August 27, 2007
Social Networks Challenging for Mass Brands
By Tom Ryan
Several widely-distributed brands have been challenged in coming up with online community hubs to tap into the popularity of MySpace, YouTube and Facebook.
Among the disappointments was Coke, which last year replaced its website with one embracing consumer-generated content, running contests that solicited submissions from users worldwide to do things like send in videos that “bottle the essence of you.” Billed as “The Coke Show,” it was recently replaced by a more generic site. Also found wanting were Wal-Mart’s social network for teens, The Hub, which was shuttered last October after three months and Bud.tv, which is being retooled after its launch at the Super Bowl.
According to Brandweek, successful corporate virtual sites have either tapped into a passionate audience around a niche brand or offer functionality unavailable on popular social media sites.
Among those that are working is the five-year-old Owners’ Lounge for Mini Cooper. About 65 percent of the more than 200,000 Mini drivers in the U.S. have registered for the site, which is only open to owners; and 40,000 are active users. “It is a small, niche product,” a Mini rep said.
In contrast, this level of connection for mass brands that compete across categories is more difficult due to inconsistent messaging.
“The Coca-Cola brand is so broad, and it’s so much easier to do this with niche brands,” Fernanda Romano, a global creative director at Interpublic Group’s Lowe, told Brandweek.
On a larger scale, one success is Nike+, a digital hub for runners to compare workout data, challenge each other and connect. Its focus on athletic performance provides the credibility to build a digital community.
“They solve a problem, and because they solve a problem, a community forms,” said Chad Stoller, executive director of emerging platforms at Omnicom Group’s Organic. “But with Coke, what problem are they solving?”
A huge hit has been Mattel’s Barbie Girls, a social network created for a new high-tech toy that attracted four million members in less than four months. Visitors can keep a virtual pet or download music.
Some feel most brands would be better off integrating with existing communities like Facebook and MySpace, although this path is not proven. Wal-Mart partnered with Facebook for its back-to-school’s effort around The Hub, but quickly found criticisms of its labor practices littering the site’s commentary section.
Pete Blackshaw, CMO at Nielsen BuzzMetrics, told Brandweek brands are still exploring their role in community building, whether launching their own virtual worlds, partnering with existing sites or simply analyzing the chatter.
“There’s been a me-tooism on the social-networking front of ‘I need to create a MySpace of my brand,’ ” Mr. Blackshaw said. “Every brand needs to do some element of it, but do they need to go all out? It’s not clear.”
Discussion Questions: Do you think online communities can work for mass-market products or are they just for niche brands? How should mass brands be looking to tap into online virtual worlds such as MySpace, YouTube and Facebook? What do you think is crucial to creating an active online social network site?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Social communities are about like-minded people making connections and sharing. A sense of community is generated by having the interaction reinforce a sense of who you are. Lifestyle brands, whether they are targeted at the “mass market” or elsewhere, have significant potential for connection in this medium. They stand for something, evoke an emotional response, and generate “be like me” behavior.
The very use of the phrase “mass market” almost entirely mitigates against successful need delivery in the social network milieu. Mass market is a term which seeks to blur distinctions in lifestyle within what is believed to be a more important variable….disposable income. People do not, with one exception, adhere to communities on the basis of their perceived disposable income. The exception is that bargain shoppers are a community unto themselves (and in fact not limited solely to those with less disposable income).
My opinion is that mass market brands do not deliver an aligned benefit which can or should be associated with the need delivery of social networks. What can Coke add to a social network site? The brand values do not create a community (any more). Do people congregate anywhere (virtual or otherwise) simply on the basis of their choice of soft drink? Not so much. Mountain Dew can add to a social network because it has associated its brand values with a lifestyle choice.
As much as I believe it’s all about presence, I have to urge care. As with anything new, it will take time to learn and develop the right approach to this type of marketing. In addition, it will take care in placing your brand where eventually you could be convicted of being guilty by association.
Learning time here is short as these types of media and connections will evolve fast and by next year could be much different than they are today. Just think, who had ever even heard of YouTube just a short time ago? A great deal of care and trust is necessary to dive in and receive any benefit. A brand could be hurt and even seriously harmed via its presence on sites like these.
While I might sound overly cautious, the speed of the market concerns me and the lack of control of what you could be connected with is a great risk. Any one of these sites, while the hot item of the day, could be the scandal of tomorrow. That’s the risk – willing to take it?
Should manufacturers create niche brands in order to benefit from online communities, or should they try to shoe-horn those communities into their existing brand marketing strategies?
My view is that major brands should use online communities for incubating new ideas and brands – such as alcoholic energy drinks like Miller Brewing’s Sparks and Sparks Plus, and Anheuser-Busch’s Bud Extra. Online communities are for testing and launching, not mass marketing of mature brands. Community members like to think they’re on the cutting edge by initiating movements instead of following them.
And Joel Warady, please remember that Sergio Zyman was the architect behind New Coke and the marketing demise of 7-Eleven. I was there and it wasn’t pretty.
Sergio Zyman predicted a few years ago that mass marketing is dying. While mass marketing won’t necessarily disappear in the near future, the fact is that social networks are a great tool to connect consumers of similar interests with the brands that they enjoy. Marketers who want to use these types of tools are going to have to execute the strategy with extreme caution. Should they annoy their customers through social networking, the negative word will spread just as fast as a positive one.
We have heard this before. Mass brands have to change the way they connect with their consumers. They have to reach consumers where the consumers live (online), and in the language in which the consumers speak. By doing this, the brands will stay relevant in their consumers’ lives.
Mass marketers can and should embrace social networking. They need to figure out how to make people interested in what they offer – but they have to remember that the internet is all about ME, not the brand. People want to excel at what they do, they want solutions to their problems, they want to hear about the latest offerings in all kinds of categories, they want to spice up their everyday lives, they want to learn about new things, they want to do all kinds of things that social networks can provide.
Social networks that can offer something meaningful to their core consumers can generate a great deal of loyalty, frequent visitors, strong member and referral base – and hey, that can grow their market share. It can’t just be about the brand, but as the brand fits in organically to the topic, consumers will be very interested in hearing more, if they are interested in the topic. It’s just another way to leverage a brand’s emotional connection with consumers – and in many cases, it can be more impactful, measurable, and cost-effective than many other marketing tactics.
Absolutely, this is where the future will be when marketing to the next generation. On-line marketing should take the form of information, education and knowledge share. If you want to throw in trials and discounts, it won’t be perceived as a negative.
There are a lot of ideas out there. One clever one is M&M’s. They send out a newsletter that is fun and inviting. It has a ton of recipes (all using their products) and craft ideas. Only comes once a month so it’s inviting. Another major brand sends out horoscopes, health advice, surveys, information and… oh, by the way, they have these products. It is interactive and allows you to input your thoughts on products, marketing, etc.
Broadly-based brands like Coke and Wal-Mart could use social networking for niche markets or to solve unique issues, like Nike. But freedom of speech produces tension, like a circus acrobat. The audience is captivated because the acrobat is taking a risk. Major brands like Coke and Wal-Mart, dominant in their categories, don’t usually embrace risk. The Wal-Mart manager in Germany who started singles shopping nights had a tiger by the tail. His winner of an idea was deemed too risky for Wal-Mart in the US. And it hasn’t been copied by any other national American retailer. That’s social networking leading directly to brand building AND sales, without any technology investment.
Whether you are looking at a national brand or a niche player, the two questions that any site is going to have to answer to be successful is, “What is in it for me?”
If you look at all of the successful sites mentioned in the article, they either had a strong social appeal to the people involved, such as the Mimi Cooper site, or they attracted a community that want to exchange data, e.g. The Nike site. If you can’t answer the question, what’s in it for the user? – don’t do it. It will not work.
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
Social communities are about like-minded people making connections and sharing. A sense of community is generated by having the interaction reinforce a sense of who you are. Lifestyle brands, whether they are targeted at the “mass market” or elsewhere, have significant potential for connection in this medium. They stand for something, evoke an emotional response, and generate “be like me” behavior.
The very use of the phrase “mass market” almost entirely mitigates against successful need delivery in the social network milieu. Mass market is a term which seeks to blur distinctions in lifestyle within what is believed to be a more important variable….disposable income. People do not, with one exception, adhere to communities on the basis of their perceived disposable income. The exception is that bargain shoppers are a community unto themselves (and in fact not limited solely to those with less disposable income).
My opinion is that mass market brands do not deliver an aligned benefit which can or should be associated with the need delivery of social networks. What can Coke add to a social network site? The brand values do not create a community (any more). Do people congregate anywhere (virtual or otherwise) simply on the basis of their choice of soft drink? Not so much. Mountain Dew can add to a social network because it has associated its brand values with a lifestyle choice.
As much as I believe it’s all about presence, I have to urge care. As with anything new, it will take time to learn and develop the right approach to this type of marketing. In addition, it will take care in placing your brand where eventually you could be convicted of being guilty by association.
Learning time here is short as these types of media and connections will evolve fast and by next year could be much different than they are today. Just think, who had ever even heard of YouTube just a short time ago? A great deal of care and trust is necessary to dive in and receive any benefit. A brand could be hurt and even seriously harmed via its presence on sites like these.
While I might sound overly cautious, the speed of the market concerns me and the lack of control of what you could be connected with is a great risk. Any one of these sites, while the hot item of the day, could be the scandal of tomorrow. That’s the risk – willing to take it?
Should manufacturers create niche brands in order to benefit from online communities, or should they try to shoe-horn those communities into their existing brand marketing strategies?
My view is that major brands should use online communities for incubating new ideas and brands – such as alcoholic energy drinks like Miller Brewing’s Sparks and Sparks Plus, and Anheuser-Busch’s Bud Extra. Online communities are for testing and launching, not mass marketing of mature brands. Community members like to think they’re on the cutting edge by initiating movements instead of following them.
And Joel Warady, please remember that Sergio Zyman was the architect behind New Coke and the marketing demise of 7-Eleven. I was there and it wasn’t pretty.
Sergio Zyman predicted a few years ago that mass marketing is dying. While mass marketing won’t necessarily disappear in the near future, the fact is that social networks are a great tool to connect consumers of similar interests with the brands that they enjoy. Marketers who want to use these types of tools are going to have to execute the strategy with extreme caution. Should they annoy their customers through social networking, the negative word will spread just as fast as a positive one.
We have heard this before. Mass brands have to change the way they connect with their consumers. They have to reach consumers where the consumers live (online), and in the language in which the consumers speak. By doing this, the brands will stay relevant in their consumers’ lives.
Mass marketers can and should embrace social networking. They need to figure out how to make people interested in what they offer – but they have to remember that the internet is all about ME, not the brand. People want to excel at what they do, they want solutions to their problems, they want to hear about the latest offerings in all kinds of categories, they want to spice up their everyday lives, they want to learn about new things, they want to do all kinds of things that social networks can provide.
Social networks that can offer something meaningful to their core consumers can generate a great deal of loyalty, frequent visitors, strong member and referral base – and hey, that can grow their market share. It can’t just be about the brand, but as the brand fits in organically to the topic, consumers will be very interested in hearing more, if they are interested in the topic. It’s just another way to leverage a brand’s emotional connection with consumers – and in many cases, it can be more impactful, measurable, and cost-effective than many other marketing tactics.
Absolutely, this is where the future will be when marketing to the next generation. On-line marketing should take the form of information, education and knowledge share. If you want to throw in trials and discounts, it won’t be perceived as a negative.
There are a lot of ideas out there. One clever one is M&M’s. They send out a newsletter that is fun and inviting. It has a ton of recipes (all using their products) and craft ideas. Only comes once a month so it’s inviting. Another major brand sends out horoscopes, health advice, surveys, information and… oh, by the way, they have these products. It is interactive and allows you to input your thoughts on products, marketing, etc.
Broadly-based brands like Coke and Wal-Mart could use social networking for niche markets or to solve unique issues, like Nike. But freedom of speech produces tension, like a circus acrobat. The audience is captivated because the acrobat is taking a risk. Major brands like Coke and Wal-Mart, dominant in their categories, don’t usually embrace risk. The Wal-Mart manager in Germany who started singles shopping nights had a tiger by the tail. His winner of an idea was deemed too risky for Wal-Mart in the US. And it hasn’t been copied by any other national American retailer. That’s social networking leading directly to brand building AND sales, without any technology investment.
Whether you are looking at a national brand or a niche player, the two questions that any site is going to have to answer to be successful is, “What is in it for me?”
If you look at all of the successful sites mentioned in the article, they either had a strong social appeal to the people involved, such as the Mimi Cooper site, or they attracted a community that want to exchange data, e.g. The Nike site. If you can’t answer the question, what’s in it for the user? – don’t do it. It will not work.