Comments on: The art of advertising

By: Creativity vs sales in marketing plans «

Creativity vs sales in marketing plans « — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 03:34:07 +0000

[...] recently ran an interview with Gareth Leck of Joe Public who discusses how local brands are opting for a quick sell over long-term brand [...]

By: Lynne Forbes

Lynne Forbes — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:43:47 +0000

n its early stages advertising was highly functional, make an advert that sells a product. I have huge book-bound collection of the Cape Times from 1928 – 1931 and it’s interesting seeing where advertising was then. Simple, sometimes dishonest – but it did the job.

Then ad agencies really came into their own in the 1980s. Absurd prices for creative, which is essentially because they are a bunch of failed artists. I am also amused at how advertising agencies believe they build brands. They don’t. They maintain them and the job is to sell. It is always, at its core, about selling. Reputation, customer engagement etc are handled by slick companies and other types of consultants, PR being one aspect, but we can’t forget business marketing consultancies.

In a recession, companies are simply no longer willing to spend millions on adverts that probably will not increase sales and instead, give the pony-tail brigade some money to create some “artwork” for. Have you not noticed how advertising, when it’s not working, just gets physically bigger? I mean, holy shit, we now have entire buildings wrapped in branding.

Advertising agencies really need to be grounded again. Remember that their job is to sell products, not win creative awards. A consumer’s experience with a brand – the heart of the company or product – is in the company’s communication and any first hand experience. Let’s take MTN as an example. Great advertising (well, it’s big) but have you tried to ring a call centre recently? Advertising agencies really need to pull themselves towards themselves and focus on the job at hand.

Personally, because I am in the industry, I am with Bill Gates who is famously known for having said: “If I was down to my last dollar I would spend it on PR.”

Cisco had made its first billion US$ before it spent a cent on advertising – a PR driven piece of business.

By: Pepe

Pepe — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:16:03 +0000

It’s great to see my partner exposing his true beliefs in public forum, and of course my comment may be interpreted as biased. Be that as it may.

Sure Ricardo, the best solution is to have both a brand and a retail component in the market. But we all know the depth of pocket you need to do that. So in absence of big, brave budgets to throw at the problem at hand, I’d hedge with big, brave ideas. Keep on planning for the first quarter century, rather than obsess about the first quarter. But good point made.

As for Jarred, my friend, creativity is what moves this world forward. You need to just visit the Design Indaba to see what I mean. And if you think that I am now just talking creative blah, have a debate with Ravi Naidoo.

Because I don’t believe that executing product with price adds any value to clients. In fact, that’s factory thinking. Creative thinking equates sound business thinking, and those who believe otherwise may have to think again. Oh, and while I have my soap box, maybe you should ask yourself why Levi’s can charge double for their jeans? Brand or product?

Hats off to Gareth!

By: ricardo

ricardo — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:32:02 +0000

I agree with you to an extent, Jarred, about the pervasiveness of digital and the measurability of it all.
Yes you need to get results and it is about results. But its human nature to want to connect with something real and authentic and that comes down to the brand. Its all very well to drive sales and results have it measured, account for ROI etc. But at the end of the day if a consumer cannot connect with your product or service on a more personal level then just driving results is not going to succeed on its own long term.
You need both and by sacrificing one over the other – you will ultimately achieve nothing in the end.

By: Jarred

Jarred — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 07:32:22 +0000

I find the concept that we should value “creativity” for it’s own the sake outmoded and — frankly — ridiculous. This is a business transaction from start to finish – someone paying someone to help them sell something to someone else. The age of measurement brought on by digital washes away the self-indulgence in which advertisers have been basking for the past 50 years.

The focus is now on results, and results alone. And I’m afraid everyone will find that creativity is not an essential ingredient in getting those results. Yes, people respond to inventiveness and originality. But they also respond to convenience, appropriateness, clarity, simplicity. And so forth. A clear, simple uncreative message delivered at the right time to the right device will outpace the most creative ideas every time.

To lament the dearth of creativity in advertising is to lament the soft crackle of valve amplifiers playing LPs, or the clinking of milk bottles on the front door step. This is a new age. Be creative if you want, but don’t expect that to be the thing that people wave huge cheques around for much longer.

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 06:48:09 +0000

Nice article. Seems like i’m always having the conversation about creative brand building vs sales with clients. In my opinion creative brand building = sales if you get it right. a crude short term focus on sales means you just get lost in the clutter of everyone else doing the same thing. Ultimately you have to spend more money with a short term approach as it weakens the brand which won’t be driving sales when your campaign finishes.