• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
TheWayoftheWeb

TheWayoftheWeb

Content and Digital Marketing Specialists

  • Blog
  • The Cipher
  • About Us
    • Useful Resources For Businesses In Peterborough, UK
  • Contact Us
  • Show Search
Hide Search

innovation

Clever Marketing From Marlboro

February 3, 2017 By Dan Thornton

Smoking is bad. Even most smokers will agree that it’s expensive and has a range of negatives even aside from the massive increases in health risks. That includes everything from nicotine stained skin to the potentially risk of setting your own hair alight during a student event at a nightclub in Hull. While the last example may have just applied to me in the 1990s, generally most people have been in favour of increased restrictions on cigarette sales, advertising and marketing.

But the flip side is that it has forced cigarette promotions to become more interesting and innovative. The strong, iconic branding allowed variations on brand names to get around new rules on sports sponsorship. For instance, the Jordan F1 team was sponsored by Benson & Hedges for around 10 years, but switched to variations including Bitten & Hisses, Buzzin Hornets and Be On Edge where cigarette sponsorship was banned.

There are also plenty of examples of product placement, including paying stars like Silvester Stallone directly to use particular products in films. And books like Buyology by Martin Lindstrom suggested how brand associations like cowboys, camels and less obvious examples including colours etc can trigger us into craving a cigarette as much, if not more, than a direct advert would have done.

Which is why I admire the skill of those promoting smoking, and look to learn from them to better promote less harmful products (We work with a wide range of brands, but have turned down offers from companies we believe offer products or services which aren’t beneficial to customers).

 

Clever Marketing From Marlboro

A new law was passed in the UK in 2016. From May 2016, all cigarette packets will be a standard green colour, logos will be prohibited, menthols are being banned, and 10-packs of cigarettes have also been withdrawn. But there has been a year’s grace period for companies to adjust and sell old stock.

So in reality it means we’re going to see branding and packets of 10 cigarettes disappear from shelves by May 2017. And that’s why I have to admit some admiration for what Marlboro has done when I visited the shops…

Clever Marketing From Marlboro. 10 pack tin packaging

It looks like a normal packet of 10 Marlboro Lights and costs the same as it did last week. But rather than being the standard cardboard packaging, it’s a durable tin packet.

And I suspect many of the marketers reading this will have already guessed why.

From May, the company will lose all their iconic branding. And anyone who previously bought a pack of 10 might well give up, rather than double their daily expenditure on a packet of 20. For instance, when I’ve cut down by smoking before eventually quitting, I found buying a pack of 10 meant I definitely tried to make them last longer.

Without that option though, I might have just gone cold turkey.

So now they’ve taken a probably marginal hit in their profits in the short-term to provide smokers with a way to continue to share their branding, and to potentially still provide that 10-pack limit.

And while for many it’s an addiction with well-known health risks, most smokers will still feel slightly cooler taking out a branded Marlboro tin and refilling it from the non-branded packs than having to take out a dull green pack with a large diseased lung on it.

 

Marketing Under Restrictions Promotes Creativity:

Would Marlboro have done something like this to promote their brand without the upcoming regulations and bans? I highly doubt it.

I’d imagine most people reading this don’t have an unlimited budget or freedom. But if you did, the danger is that you’d simply pile much more money into doing the same things. And you’d have no incentive to optimise your Adwords spend or paid Facebook content if you could just double the budget instead.

Whereas the most creative marketing often comes from constraints. Whether that’s from laws, budgets or other restrictions, it’s something that can result in far more interest and impact. I’ve just been reading ‘Things A Little Bird Told Me‘ by Biz Stone, and in it, he talks about his time designing book covers. When a brief insisted a particular photo had to be used, other designers would avoid taking that work. Instead, Biz Stone would rush to grab that job, take the photo, and then do something like blow it up 2000 times to use the massively pixellated version.

Employees are often advised ‘Don’t bring me problems, bring me solutions’.

Perhaps our marketing motto should be ‘Don’t complain about constraints, bring me creative innovations’?

The importance of beating your own drum…

April 20, 2011 By Dan Thornton

There are certain people I follow on social networks who tend to share things outside of the normal technology, social media, marketing echo chamber, and one of them is Stuart Witts, who’s as likely distribute bizarre Lego creations as digital insight. He recently shared the following video, which sparked some thoughts…

Firstly, that video has been watched almost 10 million times since June 2010 as I write this. 32,000+ people have left comments and 64,000+ people have liked it – and it’s been featured on sites such as the blog of Swedish daily newspaper Aftonbladet.

So whether or not you think the drummer is talented, funny, or making a fool of himself, it’s proved popular. And you’ll certainly remember him far more than the rest of the band…

Right about now, I’m guessing a fair number of you are thinking about this from a marketing or advertising perspective and wondering ‘How could we do something like that and go viral?’

That’s not the point!!!

Don’t get inspired by that video.

The inspiration comes from the approach of the drummer. He probably didn’t start playing drums with the dream of wearing a gold suit jacket and playing in a cover band. It’s also pretty unlikely that anyone taught him to drum the way he does in the video. And most importantly, he’s not doing it at the expense of the song – he’s hitting all the right beats, and providing the right backing for what is meant to be the chance for the guitarist to shine.

But he’s doing it in his own way, and that’s what makes him worthy of conversation and sharing.

Now picture your industry, content, and marketing:

If those band members were representating your business competitors and their marketing strategies, one brand may have secured the traditionally starring role of the singer/guitarist.

And the rest are probably much like the bass player in the video. Doing the basics, fitting into the perceived look and feel of their industry and peers. Occasionally giving a little flourish, but generally plodding along.

Neither is particular memorable.

But certain brands are able to use their passion, belief and drive to stand out far more than anyone thought possible by doing things in their own way. And that’s what makes a brand memorable, allows people to share it without shame, and encourages people to interact and purchase from it.

But what if they don’t like us?

Now, you may think that the drummer looks like an idiot, and I’m mad to suggest your brand should be twirling drumsticks when it could be providing a nice safe steady beat. Like any £100 drum machine could do.

But that assumes that bland tolerability drives purchases and sharability more than actively loving or hating something.

Far better to have a growing army of people who love what you do, and will passionately hoover up everything you can offer.

Being actively disliked by a large number of people hasn’t stopped the Daily Mail from being the second most popular newspaper website in the world, as sad as that makes me. And it’s built a large number of people who not only like what it does, but pay money to it for that product.

Being actively disliked by some people means that they might be driven enough to explain why they don’t like you, which lets you decide whether to do something about it. And just by responding to them, you can increase your business.

If you don’t run the risk of some people disliking what you’re doing, you’ll never run the risk of being able to be loved by people who are willing to part with their scarce attention and money.

Here’s to the mad drummers.

 

When novelty becomes necessity

July 1, 2009 By Dan Thornton

When technological advancements such as the printing press, telegraph or the car were invented, it took a while to get going. Even something as simple as sliced bread took a good few years before becoming widely adopted.

And yet the increasing pace of change means what seemed a novelty just a short time ago soon becomes expected.

The free wifi on National Express trains is one case in point.

When it was first introduced, it seemed like a minor miracle that I could now access the internet and get work done whilst travelling, for no extra charge, even in standard class.

But within a couple of years I’m amazed that other trains don’t have it, and I’m immensely frustrated and disappointed that the speed and reliability hasn’t improved. In fact it’s got much, much worse as more and more people are using laptops and netbooks on the train.

Mobile broadband is similar. It took a while for the mobile phone to become widely adopted, but now mobile internet access is becoming a standard and expected part of any new mobile device. And it’s data costs and anything less than 100% access that become the talking points, rather than the fact I can access the web from something in the palm of my hand.

And that frustration we feel is because we don’t just become accustomed to this access.

We come to rely on it.

For work, home, and everywhere in between.

Postscript:

Just remembered that apparently, 53% of British mobile phone users suffer ‘no mobile phobia’, or nomophobia, ‘with 48 per cent of women and 58 per cent of men questioned admitting to experiencing feelings of anxiety when they run out of battery or credit, lose their phone or have no network coverage.’ (HT Textually.org).

New business strategy for the networked world

May 6, 2009 By Dan Thornton

Dave Cushman has written an interesting starting point for locating the differentiating value your business brings to a networked world (Build on what the networks can’t touch), but while I agree with the general sentiment, I wanted to post about the theoretical problems I’m having with some of the specifics.

Dave writes:

‘Ask yourself which element of your business can NOT be disrupted as the network touches it.

Which element cannot be made more efficient, done more cheaply – done better when integrated with and disrupted by the network?’

He suggests that this element is the kernel of your business (Or Community of Purpose)

The problem is that I’m not sure there’s any part of a business that can’t be touched, disrupted or improved by the network in some way – which Dave also believes (“pretty much any process, any value chain you can think of, is awaiting disruption”)

That doesn’t mean that I don’t think there is place for distinct businesses.

I think it’s a case of modifying Dave’s approach.

There are possibly two elements I can identify which would point towards the kernel of your business:

1. The element of your business which is difficult or almost inaccessible for the network to currently disrupt.

2. The element of your business which turns the crowd/network into a Tribe or Community of Purpose with definition and leadership.

1. For instance, the cost of building a manufacturing plant is currently prohibitively expensive. It’s feasible that a network could bring together the finances required, which would remove it from Dave’s theory. But the difficulty of doing it means that the disruptive effect of the networked world has been to allow smaller manufacturers the ability to co-operate globally and to pool smaller runs of specific components into one product. If you have the resources to combine everything into a doohickey, or the pat you create requires tools which aren’t cheap and widespread, then there’s a kernel.

The same is also true online – plenty of people have ideas which will never exist because they don’t have access to developers or funding. These types of resources are essential to your business.

2. The networked world disrupts, innovates, improves on a daily basis. But there’s a big difference between crowds, Smart Mobs, and Tribes. In the comments, Dave writes that if using the network is all you have, perhaps you don’t have a business – but I don’t believe it’s about using the network at all – it’s about providing the means for the network and your business to co-create something which provides a return.

It’s the bit that turns the information within 5000 individual brains into the core of Wikipedia, or £35 donations into ownership of a football club.

I think essentially it comes down to the fact that any business is a network of people. The difference between a business and a network, is in the resources and strategy the business has, rather than seeing itself as holding a Holy Grail which will never be disrupted.

I’m not claiming for a second that you shouldn’t try for first mover advantage or use patents etc. I’m just not sure the anti-disruption field holds the answer quite yet.

I’d love to have some conversations about this, as I definitely think it’s a hugely valuable discussion – either here, or on Dave’s original post.

Scolari sacking shows short-term stupidity

February 10, 2009 By Dan Thornton

I’ve been a football fan for as long as I remember, which is around 28 years – and for that whole time I’ve supported the same team through victory and defeat. The first 20 years or so were mainly defeat, with the last eight actually having some notable victories.

But being a Chelsea fan is becoming increasingly embarrassing as despite massive funding, they seem to be ignoring examples of lasting success to always focus on the shortterm. Since the three-year reign of Jose Mourinho included winning the Premier League, we’ve had Avram Grant, who lasted one season, and Jose Felipe Scolari who lasted about half a season.

Yet look at the other leading teams in the Premiership: Alex Ferguson has managed Man Utd for 22 years. Arsene Wenger has managed Arsenal for 13 years. Rafael Benitez has managed Liverpool for almost five years. Martin O’Neil has managed Aston Villa for two-and-a-half years.

There’s a bit of a pattern here.

I’ve written before about the value of belief – and it’s something that requires constant work and attention. If you’re a manager or player who has seen little loyalty or time given to your colleagues, it’s going to affect your belief, no matter how much you’re paid.  That’s not to say pressure and competition aren’t useful, and disastrous results shouldn’t be risk-free, but it’s useless having a stick without a carrot.

And I firmly believe it applies to business, or any organisation.

People need to feel secure enough to be able to take risks and try new ideas, or you’re left in a business where innovation is stifled, and that will lead to a steady and slow decline… One which will takes more resources and effort to change, the longer it continues…

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Join us…

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter

We only exist to deliver results for your business. So you get fresh Content, expert SEO, engaging Social Media, or a new Website which is right for you – and your customers.

We help you build your brand, reach more customers and increase your revenue

Search

Categories

Creative Commons License
This work by TheWayoftheWeb is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Start growing your business today Contact Us

TheWayoftheWeb

Copyright © 2026· TheWayoftheWeb Ltd. Company Number 08038527. ICO registration: ZB397650