Blog

The multifarious and marginally edited ramblings of CTP’s human capital. i.e., Our thoughts.

Posts Tagged ‘Public Relations’

Why Lockouts Are Bad PR

Friday, November 18th, 2011

The National Basketball Players Association announced this week it had rejected the latest offer regarding its collective bargaining agreement and now it will be up to the courts to decide the fate of this year’s NBA season. Like the NFL lockout earlier this year, the NBA and the Players Association are arguing about who should get the biggest piece of the pie. When are professional sports going to learn that these lockouts are a huge PR nightmare? Not only are they losing fans and affecting thousands that depend on the business of the games, but in this oversaturated sports landscape, where is the guarantee that everyone will come back when they do return?

And this is coming from a huge NBA fan. I grew up on the San Antonio Spurs and spent several sleepless nights in Boston rooting for my team during the NBA’s last lockout season when the Spurs won their first Championship.

A fellow PR colleague asked me recently, “Who will care if the NBA doesn’t return?” And that’s the key question. Even die-hard NBA fan Bill Simmons told the SportsBusiness Journal’s “Sports Media & Technology” Conference attendees last week that he doesn’t think anyone will care if the lockout gets settled. Simmons continued saying, “You’ve got pro football and college. You have the holidays coming up. Nobody is going around thinking ‘I can’t believe the NBA’s not here.’ ” And he’s one of the sport’s biggest proponents.

And while I disagree with Simmons that fans simply don’t care (ask the thousands in the seven NBA-only markets like San Antonio if they care), I do think he’s got a point that with so many other sports options, will consumers truly miss the NBA? Probably not. They will find other ways to spend the money they would’ve otherwise spent on tickets, concessions and merchandise. And that’s where the NBA and NBPA have a PR crisis on their hands. The NBA is one of the best-marketed sports leagues in the world and has done so much to build up its brand globally and the brands of its players. Yet, it is willing to put all that at risk. And for what?  Billions of dollars that they can’t figure out how to divvy up? A 50/50 split isn’t fair? Try explaining that to your average fan who is struggling to pay his or her mortgage or find a job. That’s not an easy sell. Not when this is the third sports lockout in the past six years and by now, everyone has lost sympathy for professional athletes and team owners.

While personally I’ll be sad if there isn’t an NBA season, the true losers in this scenario aren’t the players or the team owners, but the thousands of arena workers, local businesses and team staff that have no say in the lockout and who are affected by this decision. They are the ones who do truly care about the lockout because for them, it’s their livelihood.

Tell us what you think: Do you think fans will come back to the NBA? Why?

Lessons of an anticipated product release

Friday, October 7th, 2011

It was a difficult week for one of the world’s most iconic companies. Obviously, the saddest news from Apple was that its visionary, Steve Jobs, died too young after years of failing health.  While his legacy as an innovator, inventor and marketing genius is secure, some worry about the future of the company he fastidiously built.

Ironically, his death came the day after the company’s first major product announcement since his resignation. That announcement did little to quell the unease of some.

Apple did what is unusual for them – it released an iPhone that was met with a yawn. That’s too bad because the new phone appears to be an improvement over the current version. But for many who follow the industry and the company, that’s not the point. It’s about satisfying expectations. Apple was either tone-deaf or ill-equipped to manage those expectations.

Apple, under Jobs, was masterful in how it elicited panting for the next device. The reveal almost always matched the tease as evidenced by the long lines outside Apple stores and the $100 billion in revenue. The company knew that an Apple product was not a commodity but a desire, a must-have. Jobs was more than a demanding CEO who could drive product development. He helped Apple walk the tight-rope of growing without becoming the faceless monolith with which consumers would have trouble connecting. Instead, Jobs was the brand as much as Apple. Consumers had faith that if he was behind it that was good enough for me.

Leading up to this release Apple not only didn’t have that personality to masterfully sell the product, it didn’t have appropriate radar on what the audience was expecting. It should have understood that analysts, bloggers, consumers were expecting an iPhone 5, not a 4S.  They were speculating about the bigger screen and slimmer form factor. Think about invited guests coming to your house expecting a four-course meal and bottles of Opus One only to be met by fantastic cheeseburgers and a pitcher of Margaritas. Some will be happy but others will be let down. It’s your fault for not doing a better job of understanding their expectations and managing those expectations.

Apple should have been selectively leaking news that this was going to be a 4S and, while the look will remain the same, it will be a much more robust phone with a dual-core processor, better battery, an improved camera, a cool personal assistant and speech recognition feature in Siri and the ability to travel the world with it. Apple could have said on background that it will be the best smartphone on the market and they are doing it without altering the much-loved look and feel of the current phone.

In the end, Apple will still sell tens of millions of the iPhone 4S.  They just won’t get people clamoring for it and looking to trade out of their current phone to get it, which is important in this competitive space. There is an expectation (there’s that word again) that the iPhone 5 will be released next summer with greater fanfare and consumer appreciation. For the sake of CEO Tim Cook and the future of the company without its innovative leader, let’s hope that marks the next great step for a still revered brand.

Netflix to its Customer: It’s Not You, It’s Me.

Wednesday, September 21st, 2011

The apology on Sunday by Netflix CEO Reed Hastings reminds me of a long overdrawn breakup. Two months ago, Netflix announced a change in its pricing and has been inundated with unhappy customer response since. Then on Monday, Hastings made another announcement that stunned the marketplace. Its well-branded DVD services will be called Qwikster and Netflix brand will be reserved for its streaming service.

The company will separate everything into two different websites without any pricing packages or loyalty discounts for customers that want the combined service or integration between sites, making it even harder for customers to access their services. Talk about confusion. The lack of communication and now the half-hearted response is a PR nightmare.

Netflix has thumbed its nose at the first rule of running a business: it’s all about customer service.  This is a company that built its business and brand on making it easy for customers to watch movies. No need to go to a store or stand in line, it delivered the DVD of your choice directly to your home. And with the advances in technology, it moved into streaming content, which should make everyone’s lives easier. So why is everyone so upset?

Like my mom always said, it’s not what you say, it’s how you say it. After two months of no response, a blog post and letter to customers “apologizing” is too little, too late. There may be business reasons behind the splitting of the company (sell one division off?) but poor communications has created customer confusion and aggravation.

Netflix did not keep its most important audience – its customers – in mind when making and communicating its changes. It rolled out a pricing structure change without thinking about how it would affect their customers. With the economy still in flux and millions still out of work, increasing prices in an oversaturated entertainment landscape may not have been the wisest decision. But if it was a business decision and had to happen, then there should have been a comprehensive communication plan, including customer service support, in place to insure it was understood and ultimately accepted.  Had these steps been taken, we wouldn’t be seeing this apology two months later and Netflix probably wouldn’t have lost more than one million subscribers or 7.4% decline in its stock price.

I’m not sure if its too late, but if Netflix doesn’t learn its lesson and start to think more about its customers those very customers will continue to abandon this once novel company.

 

Is there really bad press?

Tuesday, September 6th, 2011

With today’s fast-moving news cycles and a forgiving (or forgetful) public, some wonder if there really is such a thing as bad publicity. Michael Vick’s $100 million contract showed that you can recover from a storm of bad stories, not to mention PETA protests and prison time.

Some even believe that a dose of bad press can be good for you.  A 2010 study by Wharton School and Stanford University researchers attempted to show that negative reviews can increase sales for products that are not well known. Obviously, positive publicity is best, as evidenced by a study of book sales. A new author gets a 52% boost from a positive review and an established author sees a 32% spike. The study argued that a negative New York Times book review will cost a well-established author a 15% decline in book sales. A new writer, on the other hand, gets a 45% boost from a negative Times review. Say what you want about me, just spell my name right.

But some bad publicity  is much more damaging than a negative book review. Tiger Woods knows the sting of media scrutiny. His sex scandal reportedly cost hundreds of millions in a divorce settlement, lucrative endorsements and (for now) his mojo on the course. For Anthony Weiner, it cost him his seat in Congress.

In an ironic case of bad press causing your undoing, News of the World closed its doors because of the fallout from the British tabloid’s phone hacking scandal.  Jobs were lost, journalists arrested and Rupert Murdoch likely lost his shot at owning the potentially lucrative Sky TV.

Yes, there is negative publicity.

But not all bad press is terminal. Beyond the example of new authors, there’s former New York governor and current CNN host Eliot Spitzer.  And BP.

Earlier this year, BP admitted its damaged reputation from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico spill cost it valuable business opportunities. The historic disaster was made worse by poor communications strategy that initially tried to undersell the obvious damage. It suffered a quarterly loss of $17.2 billion following the spill and $3.7 billion for the full year.  But even 4.9 million barrels of crude oil in the Gulf is not a death sentence for a company. BP announced a second quarter profit of $5.6 billion in July.

If a crisis hits, smart people first fix the problem that landed them – unflatteringly – on page one and then peel back the curtain for media and public scrutiny.  Beyond the mea culpa must be substance. They know there  is another story Americans love almost as much as the scandal. It’s the reclamation. But it has to be real.

It remains to be seen as to whether Vick has been sincere. But to date he has been open and apologetic in admitting his transgressions. Tiger has been the same aloof, some would say arrogant, person he was before he got caught. Not only did Vick sign a contract, he’s getting endorsement deals and, for most, his crime was far more heinous. Tiger, on the other hand, has only added one endorsement deal – in China – and he continues to lose them.

Einstein said doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is a sign of insanity. It’s also a recipe for continued bad press. Even a struggling author knows good press is better than bad.

 

 

 

Good things happen when brands unite

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

I recently found myself dreaming about bringing two brands together. My wife was tapping away on her iPad as I was driving along unfamiliar roads during a family vacation. She had access to information that I wanted on the dash. Reading espn.com, watching “Modern Family” episodes or going through email doesn’t make sense at 75 MPH. But  live traffic updates, route options, extensive music playlists?  It got me wondering about which automaker would make a good partner for Apple? At that moment I wished for a Honda-Apple marriage. A few years ago there was talk that it would team up with Mercedes. It never happened. Is it the earthy Subaru set?  Lexus? Audi? Volvo?

Automakers continue to embrace relationships with other brands to improve their vehicle experience. Toyota and Microsoft this month announced a partnership to do just what I dreamed about driving along the Shenandoah Valley.  Or they do it to put their cars in front of consumers, like Acura is planning to do for the first time with a major motion picture.

But what if you’re not selling cars, motion pictures or technology? What makes a smart partnership?

Regardless of your industry or marketing budget there is another company that would make an ideal partner. They could improve your customers’ user experience or help introduce your product to a new audience. The ideal partner has credibility, shares some of your personality traits and values, and owns both an established voice and loyal audience.  Ultimately, you are best served when both partners can achieve something greater than a pay-for-play sponsorship.

A committed relationship builds incentive for both organizations, whether matching a company with a cause or bringing together two brands. You have to be on the same page with all tenets of the relationship for it to bring real value.  And be careful not to take on too many partners. As a CTP colleague points out, “Don’t go so overboard in sticking your name on other people’s stuff so much so that it eventually becomes meaningless to consumers and worthless to prospective partners. Like Swarovski.”

When done right, though, partnerships benefit both companies and the consumer.

Now if we can only get Cold Stone, Five Guys and JetBlue in the same room.

Back to Top

© 2012 Conover Tuttle Pace. All Rights Reserved.