Chocolate never felt this good before - repositioning a brand with style

Piyush Pandey, the Executive Chairman and National Creative Director of Ogilvy India has redefined Indian advertising in more ways than one. But in the midst of all his achievements, awards and accolades, there is a commercial from the nineties which can make you feel good like nothing can. Well, almost nothing. See it if you don't believe me.



If Hindi as a language is not your strong point, watch this one. Though I guess the original version is always better, which is Hindi in this case.



Pandey repositioned Cadbury chocolates as an impulse buy for adults. Not a mean feat considering the fact that chocolates and children were synonymous in most Indian households back in the nineties. In the early days of globalization, lack of variety and the popularity of Indian sweets relegated chocolates for the kids in the family. The ad shown above, which is my all time favorite and a series of ads based on the same strategy changed the way Indians looked at chocolates. And Cadbury expanded its target profile by leaps and bounds. When it comes to the parent brand, it is not surprising that Cadbury India has stuck with Ogilvy & Mather for ages, despite the prevalent fickleness in most agency-client relationships.

Apart from making you smile, another striking quality of the above ad is the lack of celebrities. Pandey doesn't believe in spending money on celebs as is quite evident from the best of his work. I have worked with clients like Colgate and Cadbury who would have gasped in horror at the mere idea. They had a point. Some of their brands were built with a certain celebrity in mind and the brand personality matched perfectly. They had the currency, the resources and the contacts. Who was I to complain? Though I still think it is unecessary provided you have a great idea.

Well, Piyush Pandey had it. The "great idea". He did magic with a brand and made it acceptable to a larger population. In India, that means a perceptible increase in sales figures. So everybody from the agency, the marketing and sales department and the consumers are happy. How many brands can say that with confidence?

Crunch on it!

Click on image to enlarge

Market Research agencies. Most clients are obssessed with them and most creative directors couldn't care less about them. Welcome to the nightmare that is account management.

Having said that, I must say I am with the creative team on this one. The amount of money spent on analysis, re-analysis, focus groups and dissection of basic human emotions could very well feed a small country.

Here's an example from when I worked with a well-known confectionery brand in Mumbai, India. The product was a candy worth 1 Indian Rupee (which roughly translates to 2 US cents). We were part of a team doing a television spot worth much much more. (Sorry, the amount is confidential). Three scripts were finalized.

Storyboards were sketched and developed into roughly animated videos, which were handed over to the "research agency" to test. Focus groups were based on the core target group and a huge amount of money was spent. Again, the amount is confidential. On the day of the presentation of the final result, the research agency walked into the conference room armed with the latest laptops and loads of findings. Client and agency waited for the final verdict.

Much was said about the "state of one's mind" while chewing a hard candy vis-a-vis a softer one. The "crunch factor" in the candy was scrutinized. The eating technique was discussed with figures and charts. Did people suck and then bite or bite and then chew the pieces or did they just go on sucking till the candy melted in their mouth? The creative was classified into sections based on certain parameters, few of them quite vague and the audience response even more so. More charts and figures followed.

The client chose the script with the most ratings. The spot was made. Another bout of research followed. Also known as the post production testing. The spot did okay. Client was happy. The spot was released on national television.

Last I heard, we are going back to the drawing board because the client's marketing department has done some research which has gone on to show how our brand proposition is all wrong. Gotta start from scratch, guys!

Super Bowl Commercials - why spend so much money on them?

So much is being written about the Super Bowl commercials. The spots are being rated, categorized, praised and criticized. Well, nothing new about that. What is new though is that companies are reducing costs and struggling to survive in this economic slowdown.

According to Forbes.com, the game attracts almost 100 million viewers, a rather astonishing number given that there are only about 300 million people in the country. In 2008, the official price of a Super Bowl ad was $2.7 million for 30 seconds. This was up from $2.6 million in 2007 and $2.5 million in 2006.

Guess what, this year, it was a whopping $3 million for 30 seconds. Of course, it offers a great marketing opportunity for big brands with big budgets. But does that justify the ad spend? Most advertising agencies in US would jump at the prospect of creating a Super Bowl commercial. For once, the Creative Department would accomodate crazy deadlines and make life that much easier for the Account Management guys. But I can't seem to get rid of this doubt...does spending millions on a commercial make business sense in this economic situation?

Companies are freezing salaries, people are getting laid off, big organizations are downsizing and even the holidays couldn't make people spend like they did last year or the year before that. So why this sudden splurge?

The Super Bowl spot is best used to launch a new product or create long-term brand associations. Remember Toyota Prius and Macintosh? Both made their debut during the Super Bowl. And then we have Coke, Pepsi, Budweiser, Audi, Castrol Oil...the endless list of long-term brand builders with deep pockets and fancy computer graphics. But are today's worried consumers listening? Seems like they are...but only to which concern them.

According to Media-Research firm Innerscope, the top 5 most emotionally engaging Super Bowl ads had everything to do with the present state of the economy. CareerBuilder and Cash4Gold being case in point. Even Hyundai, with their Assurance Program is making an impact on consumers scared of losing their jobs.

Obviously, if an ad sends out the right message at the right time, the target demographic will be engaged but will they be convinced enough to buy something they don't really need? With tips to live frugally flooding the web, will a car-chase or a talking monkey move the American people to shell out their hard-earned dollars? Will a "laugh-out-loud" moment or a "feel-good" ad make us reach out for our wallet?

No, I don't think it will. What it will do though is inject a drop of hope into our minds. Making us imagine a world filled with brand new product possibilities, a healthy rise in consumer demand and subsequently a recovering economy. For now, it is all a dream. But, doesn't all great achievements start with one?

'Trust Me' me on TNT - branded entertainment at its best

Creative executives, Hunt Baldwin and John Coveny are part of the team responsible for creating "Trust Me", a series premiering tomorrow on TNT. The authenticity is provided by the fact that both have worked at agencies like Leo Burnett, JWT and Y&R.

Now, what does this mean for all the brands competing with each other in every possible media in every possible way? Can we hold the television viewer's attention in today's fast paced touch-screen dominated world? Let's hope so, for Unilever's sake. Apart from being one of the sponsors of the show, Dove hair care products are actually being woven into the story-line. Which of course is no big deal since the show deals with brands and products anyway.

And that is why big brands like Apple, Chris-Craft boats, Effen vodka, Green Giant, Hallmark, Frosted Flakes from Kellogg’s, Nike, Pillsbury, Potbelly Sandwich Works and Starbucks have jumped on the proverbial bandwagon. Not all of them have the luxury of being the focus of an episode, some are merely being mentioned or featured...in-show or in-film brand placement as we know it.

To balance out the heavy dose of real brands, the show also has a few imaginary products like Arc Mobile Cellphone Service. But is that enough to ensure that the series maintains its distinct flavor and doesn't become lost in a sea of brand promotions? In order to preserve its individuality, the script of the show may sometimes deviate from what the sponsors prefer.

According to the Jan 21, 2009 New York Times - David Rubin, United States marketing director for Unilever hair brands in Chicago is fine with it. “What is so central on any branded integration,” Mr. Rubin said, “and I’ve worked on a bunch, is that with the ones that do it right, the brand’s involvement adds to the story being told without usurping the storyteller’s job.The show has to be great entertainment for me to succeed in doing what I’m trying to do.”

True, and given the premise of the show, it will be fairly impossible for it to be anything other than entertaining. Having worked in an advertising agency including two of the three mentioned above, I can safely say that no advertising firm can dare to be boring. Ego clashes, weird fashion choices, creative temperament, hard-to-please bosses and unreasonable client demands...all add in making an ad agency unlike any other.

Pod-busting, but of course!

In a desperate attempt to engage viewers, more and more TV networks and advertisers are resorting to creative innovation in US. The last couple of years saw a surge in "pod-busting" which was initially restricted to MTV, VH1 and Comedy Cenral keeping their young gadget-friendly demographic in mind. In 2005, MTV invented the concept of pod-busting which proved to be partly successful though not a radical movement. Slowly bigger networks caught on. Now, what exactly is pod-busting?

According to the International Herald Tribune, "This year, for the 2008-2009 television season, the networks are betting on a panoply of "pod-busters" - unconventional content meant to entice viewers to pay attention during the commercial breaks, which are also called pods.

"It's a form of creative insinuation," said John Ford, president at Discovery Channel U.S., part of Discovery Communications. "It's a little Zen-like: being intrusive without seeming intrusive." On the drawing board is a promotion for "Shark Week" during the series "Deadliest Catch," during which digital sharks will leap from the water.

The clip can be watched at http://video.nytimes.com/video/2008/07/01/business/1194817107135/deadliest-catch-on-shark-week.html

The main types of pod-busters can be classified as below:

• Minisodes/bitcoms/ micro-series sponsored by marketers


• Sponsored clips that combine elements of shows and commercials


• Promos of one program shown inside another program, thanks to digital effects


• Content of commercial matched to theme of the program (In fact, the buzz word for matching themes of shows and commercials is TV in Context. While it sounds right strategically, it helps in pushing engagement metrics only when done right.)

Examples of pod-busters to help understand the concept:

Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.(TBS) - The cable network started offering "bitcoms" in 2008 — an original comedy sketch involving a brand, followed by its ad.

Sunsilk - The Unilever hair care brand worked with TBS to create Lovebites, a series of two-minute "minisodes" presented by Sunsilk which ended with offers of product samples from the Sunsilk website. This minisodes were aired during "Sex and the City". Yes, similiar content is a major driver in such innovations.

This does not mean that networks are giving up on the conventional 30-sec format which makes up more than 50% of TV advertising. It is cost-effective, it is a standard selling unit and it is very much alive. Marketers are just trying to find better and newer ways to keep the target audience engaged. Not an easy task in these days of TiVos and other DVRs.

If the advent of pod-busters means we will see less of inane logo-driven commercials, testimonials and comparitive ads, then this is definitely the direction of the future. The results are complying. Known for their penchant for pod-busting initiatives, MTV, VH1 and Comedy Central have jumped from -15 percent to -5 percent in their commercial ratings deliveries, according to Adweek of Jan 14, 2009. No mean feat in today's distracting environment and a young demographic with an ever-decreasing attention span.

Is India listening?