Archive for April 2012

Brand Damage and Your Crisis Management Plan

April 20th, 2012 — 9:36am

Short-term gains are not always going to align with your brand strategy. What manipulates a higher (current) ROI can have adverse and long-term effects, which result in a tarnished brand image. There are a lot of components in both your overall business and marketing models that create, grow, and also maintain a strong and meaningful brand, including company ethics, customer service, and innovation.

Companies use branding to enhance customer perceptions – perceptions that will ultimately embrace or destroy a brand image, and heavily impact the bottom line.

But, what happens when consumers experience a loss of trust in you or your product?

Trust is extremely difficult to define. In some cases it directly correlates to customer satisfaction while in other cases it relates to ethical alignment. Netflix consumers lost trust in 2011 when the DVD company hiked prices up by 60 percent.  Ozzie Guillen, MLB Miami Marlin’s Manager, stated, “I love Fidel Castro,” in a Time Magazine interview and upset thousands of fans.

Continue reading »

Comment » | Welt

Why did Facebook Buy Instagram? Out of spite…

April 11th, 2012 — 8:08am

On Facebook, the single largest shareable is photos. Most of the people that use Instagram all have Facebook profiles, and even though Instagram works very well at what it does, it only really does one thing. This is strictly our opinion, but the reason that Facebook splashed out a cool bil. on Instagram is to spite its competitors.  Facebook had no intent of letting a Google get it, or a Twitter. But to be honest, we don’t think anyone at Facebook thought of either of them ascompetitively the most dangerous thing out there. We would be willing to bet that Facebook did this to prevent Instagram from teaming with a new or as yet unheard of potential competitor.

In fact, we’d go so far as to say that if Facebook were looking at the situation through cold calculations, they would have seen Instagram itself as a potential juggernaut. Instagram (as we mentioned earlier) does one thing well, and that is share photos. It could be argued that this “one thing” is raison d’etre of social media on the whole.  Facebook now owns the “one touch” of the industry.

Don’t believe us?

Continue reading »

Comment » | Welt

Ad Fail – #TidyCatsStinks

April 10th, 2012 — 9:18am

Last week Purina’s Tidy Cats launched a “No More PU” billboard campaign with the intent to start conversations about things in life that stink (#lifestinks). The campaign, which was also meant to be funny, rubbed people the wrong way in Cincinnati, when a billboard in Over-The-Rhine read: “You’re so over Over-The-Rhine. #lifestinks”.

Insulted and very angry (rightly so), Cincinnati residents took to Twitter. Tidy Cats issued apologies to complaints and by Thursday night, the ad was covered up with a billboard promoting Purina pet adoption.

Tidy Cats, good effort at being quick to try and correct this, but for many the damage is already done. We love OTR and this campaign was #notfunny.

Hit us back…

Comment » | Welt

Ad Fail – American Girls

April 5th, 2012 — 12:08pm

Many young girls today are growing up touting their look-alike American Girls dolls, playing dress up with them, and visiting the American Girls Store to eat, shop, visit the hair salon, and get a check up at the doctor. For the most part these dolls are wholesome and a seemingly innocent companion for little girls.

This wholesome image is being (creepily) disturbed by a stream of editorial photos in which girls pose with their dolls. The second photo on the album pictures a young girl, no more than 11 or 12, laying in a promiscuous pose, and wearing a skimpy bikini with her doll on a balcony that totes a city scene view. Due to the inappropriate content of the photos Welt will not be reposting them on our blog.

Note: these images are photographed by Ilonia  Szwarc and is represented by Redux Pictures — the company that does American Girls editorials.

In our opinion, the dolls (and the little girls who own them) are, unfortunately, represented poorly in these images and do not represent an innocent or wholesome image for fans (and hopefully their parents).

We feel that these pictures are:

1. Not a positive look for American Girls;
2. Do not represent the company well;
3. Are exploiting younger girls;
4. Are extremely inappropriate;
5. …What were they thinking?!

What do you think? Hit us back…

Comment » | Welt

Back to top