What’s in a Name?

Apparently not much, even though brand and name recognition are still ballyhooed as the be-all and end-all.

Perhaps you’ve heard, but have you seen the ads for Ally Bank? Sounds like a nice bank to do business with, right? I mean, what better ally to have than a bank?!

Interestingly, the new Ally Bank is the artist formerly known as GMAC—the financing arm of the now bankrupt and TARP-funded General Motors. For their marketing team it’s no brainer strategy; but in our transparent world, the truth eventually outs itself.

Do you suppose anyone gives a damn? Is our screwed threshold so high that this type of subterfuge doesn’t bother us? Incidentally, adding insult to injury, Ally Bank’s theme line is “Straightforward.”

So, how about a little more BS? Another financial institution decided it too would change its name to avoid the stigma of being perceived as a company that doesn’t know much about managing its business. Remember A.I.G.? The insurance company “too large to fail”? It appears they figured if they changed just one letter in their name we might feel better about them. Today A.I.G. is A.I.U. Really clever repositioning.

The gold medal winner for name changes is the Bank of Wichita. In an apparent effort to get down with their customers, they changed their name to Redneck Bank. I kid you not.

Hey you know what? I’m feeling like I need a little overhaul myself. I think I’ll chuck this feeble Loose Change moniker, along with all the lame columns I’ve penned.

From here on out call me Big Bucks.

Yeah, I like that.

Old School

So, I’m reading NY Times columnist and former Minnesotan David Carr’s wistful recount of the retirement party for Peter Kaplan, the outgoing editor of the New York Observer and arguably one of the finest examples of city journalism this country has ever seen. As long as I’m on the subject, I’ll throw New York magazine into that bucket.

Following the event, bunches of old-line New York journalists attended a post-ceremony bash at an old-line restaurant, Elaine’s. David left to check out the afterparty a couple of tech-centric journalism groups—CollegeHumor and Guest of a Guest—were throwing at the Hotel on Rivington.

David remarked that people were staring at him at that party, composed of 20– and 30–somethings. If you’ve ever seen David in person, you’d probably understand why they were staring. He’s an otherworldly looking dude and a celebrity of sorts in NYC, being one of the best-read media columnists in America as well as the author of a bestselling tell-all memoir.

David assumed they were staring because he was taking notes on a reporter’s notebook, something he likened to “prancing around with an abacus.” Apparently intimidated by aging, David imagined he was being judged by this young crowd as an out of touch, over the hill, crotchety old-school journalist.

I doubt the staring was rooted in profiling, though there is a quiet discrimination among some elitist technorati that mainstream media guys just don’t get it. “So shut up,” they say, “and leave the world to texters, tweeters, techtwits, and the inevitable Rapture that would result.”

My advice to David is to yank up the old trousers, get over this silly age insecurity thing, and, pen clutched firmly in arthritic hand, stand tall, or at least as tall as an elfin, waif-like figure will allow.

On a similar note, I was standing in line outside the Grizzly Bear concert at the Cedar Cultural Center a few nights ago, and a young couple standing near me asked “How do you keep up with music like Grizzly?” I responded I didn’t know what “keep up” means. It’s simply what I do. Although an innocent question, I thought it belied a generalization, perhaps even a stereotype, some young people have about their older planet-mates.

Maybe David’s insecurities have roots after all?

Not a Sea Change

I’ll be the first to say it, and thus the first to be absolutely pilloried by the technorati . . . again (see BOB blogs: here, here, and here).

I predict, as the economy begins its slow and laborious rebound, there will be a return among marketers to traditional, legacy media (e.g., magazines, television, and radio), because we’re all learning they are the most effective platforms for marketing products and advertising campaigns.

It doesn’t take a genius to look over the past five years of tech hype to know that it was just that—a lot of hoo-ha that simply did not deliver for most marketers. Piles of research and anecdotal experience say it is so.

Understand, this is not technology’s failing. Indeed technology and all its wondrous applications have spawned the greatest social and communications transformation of the past 100 years. Put it right up there with penicillin, electricity, automobiles, and the cathode ray tube.

The thing is, in its myriad manifestations, tech has proven to be more social revolution than transcendence (for marketers) from mainstream media to the Web. It just hasn’t worked out.

I have my theories why, one being rooted in intention, i.e., people expect utility and interaction from the Web. They are turned off, or at the very least disinterested, by attempts to sell them stuff. The stats prove it unequivocally.

Note: this is not a blanket statement. And also note this back to the future paradigm shift does not include newspapers, which I believe are doomed. There will continue to be massive efforts to market effectively on the Web, no doubt. But let’s go on the record right now and say the early reports of the mainstream media’s death are turning out to be grossly exaggerated.

This Sucks

I’ll admit to being a suit. I mean, I run a company, albeit small.

Right now, things suck—as in butt ugly.

If for some strange reason your company is not struggling, well, I hope you’re saying your thank-you prayers each night. I don’t know of a business that isn’t up to its eyeballs in cost reductions, layoffs, and spending every single day worrying about how to get out of this mess rather than how to effectively run their business.

I was sitting at a senior management meeting the other day, and the guy I report to looked at me and said, “You know, you’re responsible for your layoffs.”

Rattled, I replied, “Yes, I know.”

He went on to say that layoffs are the result of bad management.

My defenses immediately went, “Hey, wait just a minute, what about the worst economy in 80 years? What about advertising revenues down 40 percent? What about a digital economy that is un-monetizable, yet capital intense? What about acquiescing to risky projects driven by a highly competitive marketplace?”

What about that?

He’s right.

Best/Worst Practices

There are companies that seem to do all the right things. Others not so much. Because I’m supposed to have an opinion about these types of things, I thought I’d occasionally share my observations about businesses who hammer at the market by hitting the nail on the head or splat their thumb open like a pizza. Surprisingly, even the largest corporations miss the mark.

A case in point is Condé Nast, a 75–year-old, multi-billion dollar publishing enterprise. Two years ago they rolled out what was touted to be the best business magazine and Web site on the planet, Portfolio.

The much-anticipated first issue, fat with ads, hit the streets, garnering rave reviews. Personally, I thought it was a swing and a miss.

At the same time I was noticing signs that its signature lifestyle magazine, Vanity Fair, was missing the mark as well. When the second issue of Portfolio came out, it was even worse! What was wrong? These are the smartest people in the industry, I thought. Further, the wunderkind group publisher of the magazine was being positioned as Condé’s next president.

Well, last month Condé Nast shut down Portfolio, after spending, get this . . . 100 million smackers.

Having your finger on the pulse of your customer, and the culture at large, is the whole enchilada for magazine publishers. Retailers too. Both industries serve incredibly fickle markets. Getting inside people’s heads like a New Yorker cartoon, anticipating peoples’ thoughts and articulating their feelings is the key to maintaining and strengthening brand. It’s more true today than ever.

My best-practices example of that is Post, the cereal company. They’re running ads, created by the Ogilvy agency, that run against the grain (sorry) of the current American obsession with progress at all costs. Post’s theme line boasts, “We put the ‘No’ in innovation.” It goes on to explain they have chosen not to sex up their Shredded Wheat brand with added sugar, dried fruit, or vitamin supplements. It’s an ingenious way to respond to what’s in all our heads, i.e., perhaps all that money-grubbing, progress-driven commerce of the last 20 years was a mistake, after all?

Even if it wasn’t a mistake, it’s what many of us are wondering. Smart marketing.