I am not sure what the big deal is here: Intel has said it will change its logo, as well as its marketing strategy, to encompass its traditional products but other ventures such as devices and healthcare.
   It’s not a radical change, but radical enough to warrant the change in visuals. After all: it has a strategic direction that others might not expect; the environment has changed since the original marketing strategy was set; there is a change in marketing that seems to be supported by top management; the existing image is deemed incompatible with the desired one.
   We’re talking about the Intel brand being on the outside: ‘Intel outside’, rather than ‘Intel inside’.
   And overall, it’s a neat trick, and I wonder just how unexpected it all was.
   Intel began as a chip maker and consumers never saw its brand. It was strictly B2B.
   Then, it began to co-brand, with the ‘Intel inside’ logo. And now, this is the next step: Intel will have its own consumer products that extend its expertise as a chip maker on to devices.
   Technique: change and spend to reinforce the reasons for that change.
   When you have as much money as Intel, and you face a slow-down in revenues in the coming year, it’s worth trying to shift perceptions on a grand scale. I still prefer involving communities in brand changes, and managing their perceptions, but at the same time, this old-fashioned method has its place. It will be interesting to observe how well it is executed in this day and age of the consumer movement, and how, in six and twelve months’ time, impressions have shifted.
   My bet? It will be so successful no one will mention the change in half a year’s time. There will be sufficient internal changes, too, to signal the new Intel, given the indications of top-level support.
   And that was my first post of the New Year: it is 11 hours, 17 minutes in to 2006 here. posted by Jack Yan, 10:07 PM  permalink

With 40 minutes to go before I see in the New Year, as the first of the Beyond Branding team to do so, I wish everyone well for 2006. It’s been a hectic ride through 2005—and I know 2006 will be a year where a lot of our dreams will finally advance. Happy branding to all! posted by Jack Yan, 10:20 AM  permalink

To the staff of the Beijing News: I am with you guys all the way. The Beijing News’s staff has walked out over the Politburo-imposed sacking of its editor. This highlights how much Red China needs to progress before others can be assured that dealing with the nation won’t result in repatriation or worse—and what use is a newspaper brand if people know the information remains state-controlled?
   I do not know how much of the strike will get out into the public. If it does leak out, then it will only strengthen the News’s brand as a beacon of independent journalism. Once again, the Politburo’s meddling boosts the party which it opposes—just as it did for the Dalai Lama.
   Incidentally, before anyone points out the flag—this is the only one I recognize as standing for Chinese freedom. posted by Jack Yan, 2:08 AM  permalink

Fortune 500 companies that blog don’t do as well with their share price, indicate data cited by PSFK. Chris Anderson and Doc Searls hypothesize ‘that the companies that blogged were often those that had less coherent and successful corporate messaging that those that didn’t.’
   This sounds correct to me. Some of the corporations that use corporate blogging don’t take back any notion of how the brand should be managed, though I am sure they do use some of the ideas fed back by readers for other areas of their businesses (as in sales). It is possible for these blogs to help these companies—but they must integrate them into the branding and marketing communications’ processes, complete with feedback.
   Trouble is, companies like GM don’t seem to possess a two-way communications’ model. The GM Fast Lane blog reflects one-way thinking, based on the times I have visited it. It, like the rest of GM’s marketing, still smacks of “fire it out”, rather than, ‘How do you view us today, and where can we take you?’ The brands are still driven by the few, rather than the many, at their peril.
   It’s not the blogs at fault, it’s the failure to consider them as part of the branding process, and by extension the overall strategy.
   A final comment on this as I sense Chris Macrae will ask the same: how do we know the share price is the best indication of the corporation’s strength? Should blogs be measured against them? Or should they be measured on the strength of the informal networks, and their potential (ultimately) to perform better in brand awareness, sales, market share or social responsibility—which might not be reflected in the share price readily? posted by Jack Yan, 12:39 AM  permalink

Ever since I covered the new Jaguar XK in Lucire’s print edition about three months ago, I have been in love with the car. Ian Callum’s styling is impressive, especially as it’s the culmination of a dream he has held since he was a boy: to create his own Jaguar from concept to release.
   It’s getting plenty of below-the-line coverage (such as in Lucire’s recent ‘The Car to Be Seen in’, which I chair), which is why I think its latest campaign, covered by Frederik Samuel at the Advertising/Design Goodness blog, is a clever one. The ads focus on the word gorgeous and hardly show the product. Frederik doesn’t like them, but I do.
   They make sense to me: consumers are more cynical and sophisticated. They don’t need to be shown a product that is already getting a lot of attention (with more to come as it is released, market by market). If anything, showing the product makes it all duller. Most western car buyers surf to get more info. And, finally, a car is a fashion item, especially when it comes to XK Jags. People buy into a lifestyle, and Jaguar needed to define that as more future-looking than the image it presently holds (with the likes of Arthur Daley and John ‘Two Jags’ Prescott being its proponents).
   At least it isn’t that ‘new Jag generation’ campaign which had Sting flogging X-types, a car that appealed mainly to the ‘old Jag generation’.
   Too-thin supermodel types and the Jaguar leaper have their place, and they work together beautifully here. Buying a Jaguar XK is about an image, so why not play on the fantasy first, provide the setting, and allow the customer to fill in the gaps with his or her own little adventures?
   The campaign is at this link, including videos. posted by Jack Yan, 10:55 PM  permalink

Bloomberg is reporting that AT&T will unveil a new branding campaign, saying that the brand needs redefining. Two matters stood out for me without checking with company insiders:

Chief Executive Officer Edward Whitacre kept the AT&T name because of its international recognition and a 128-year tradition of innovation. …
   AT&T will blanket Times Square in New York with the message “Your World Delivered” to convince customers the San Antonio-based company can meet all their communications needs, Shelley Almager, director of advertising, said in an interview.
   “This is a substantially different company,” Almager said.

   Can someone be so frank as to tell me in one sentence what is different? What is the new brand’s proposition, and does the new slogan act as a useful rallying point for such a large company?
   And if the advertising campaign is to signal a difference, does it not go against the CEO’s decision to retain its name due to its ‘tradition of innovation’?
   Perhaps it would have been wiser to say, ‘We’re different because everything about us is innovative.’
   Follow that up with this, if needed: ‘We want this branding campaign to reinforce our innovative values. People have forgotten that AT&T has been an innovator since Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone. Now, with SBC, we actually have the potential to innovate like crazy.
   ‘It’s that innovation we’re driving through every aspect of our company. Not only do we have the assets to do it, we’re implementing it in the way we behave.’
   Then follow that through with new staff programmes, casual dress, ways of working with customers on developments and brand direction (‘How can we be innovative in solving your problem today?’), and a cheeky campaign that serves as an internal and external trigger for a revitalized firm.
   It’s too easy for a non-American to be cynical about a campaign from a large American corporation. Those in this branding profession often joke about how rooted in the 1950s most corporate campaigns are in the States.
   And Mr Whitacre’s press release comment at the time of the new logo, which he might not have authored, is very much in the 1950s’ vein: ‘The revitalized mark symbolizes these attributes—innovation, integrity, quality, reliability and unsurpassed customer care.’ In other words, here are some buzzwords. It means nothing. Because every other telco promises these things. Come to think of it, almost every other company in the world promises these things.
   Let’s hope this will not follow the same dull route. After all, AT&T has the technology through which many people will be reading this blog entry. It seems logical that it is the company that will implement a globally advanced campaign, especially when you read the assets it possesses. It is possible—it just needs to communicate this a lot more succinctly and directly. posted by Jack Yan, 1:31 PM  permalink

Prior episodes of advents end published here this month : 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

---

When I was writing World Class Brands in 1990 - my attempt to transform out of advertising imaged products to communal gravitations people loved to be proud of participating in - I speculated what were the least understood brands od 1990-2000? I valued how I could develop some passioately curious identification charters at that time for nations, Royalty and other constitutions, types of media a country was dominated by, whether a country had any people's media left (as an example from the last decade: Brazil's people found themselves so suffocated by commercial media that they literally took to the streets with the world social fora movement, and chnaged city government transparency, and started getting the church to reconnect with the economics of such human rights as clean water).

CLUB OF CITY
15 years on and 20 million collaboration knowledge city bookmarks later, people networks need to go way beyond nations and reclaim cities and global villages. Branding the future of London is the most vital opportunity I have access to -beyond any corporate client - because tens of thousands of Londoners have read my co-authored books since 184, and at least 1000 are on email with me clarifying what their greatest inquiry for the future is. More importantly all I also ask is they try and connect whatever we learn in London with one other less advantaged place in anothger hemisphere that their family history loves.

PROJECT30000, REGENERATE THE BBC CHARTER, & ENTREPRENEURILAL BIRTHDAY PARTIES of 2006
This is how we first scripted the project30000 debate back in 1984 as a transition for going beyond being ruled only by biog govenance whether the typology is national government, Eupopean Sprouts, Global Corporation, Professions whose selfish global rush to monopolise measurement or writing of law has forgotten their deep oaths to serve people, charities whose global fund raising has lost their grassroots cause, and other systemic abuses of trust-flow*transparency*sustainability and the economics of expoentials which we invite those who want to join the 30th birthday party of Entrepreneurial Revolution to co-script with us in 2006



Action Networking Now around E4

Project30000

know waves of such foundation contexts: 1) as life depends on clean water;2) energy depends on we help nature work with the sun; 3 discuss with uis what you believe number 3 is and we'll try and link you to some like-gravitated people

People for Public Broadcasting 1 2 3 - Brand Chartering's 10th birthday parties 2006

aSIN

microfinance, and helping map the global villages 1 2 people like you most love sustaining

---

Changing Economics

The introduction of the international Centrobank was the last great act of government before government grew much less important. It was not a conception of policy-making governments at all, but emerged from the first computerised town meeting of the world.

By 2005 the gap in income and expectations between the rich and poor nations was recognised to be man's most dangerous problem. Internet linked television channels in sixty-eight countries invited their viewers to participate in a computerised conference about it, in the form of a series of weekly programmes. Recommendations tapped in by viewers were tried out on a computer model of the world economy. If recommendations were shown by the model to be likely to make the world economic situation worse, they were to be discarded. If recommendations were reported by the model to make the economic situation in poor countries better, they were retained for 'ongoing computer analysis' in the next programme.


In 2024 it is easy to see this as a forerunner of the TC conferences which play so large a part in our lives today, both as pastime and principal innovative device in business. But the truth of this 2005 breakthrough tends to irk the highbrow. It succeeded because it was initially a rather downmarket network television programme. About 400 million people watched the first programme, and 3 million individuals or groups tapped in suggestions. Around 99 per cent of these were rejected by the computer as likely to increase the unhappiness of mankind. It became known that the rejects included suggestions submitted by the World Council of Churches and by many other pressure groups. This still left 31,000 suggestions that were accepted by the computer as worthy of ongoing analysis. As these 31000 community dialogues were honed, and details were added to the most interesting- with cross-linking and the co-mentoring practices of 12th grade email understood by people and those who design social software (eg 1 2) an exciting consensus began to emerge. Later programmes were watched by nearly a billion people as it became recognised that something important was being born.

These audiences were swollen by successful telegimmicks. The presenter of the first part of the first programme was a roly-poly professor who was that year's Nobel laureate in economics, and who proved a natural television personality. He explained that economists now agreed that aid programmes could sometimes help poor countries, but sometimes most definitely made their circumstances worse. When Mexico was inflating at over 80 per cent a year in the early 1980s , the inflow to it of huge loanable funds made its inflation even faster and its crash more certain. The professor set Mexico's 1979-1981 economy on the model, pumped in the loaned funds and showed how all the indicators ( higher inflation, lower real gross domestic product and so on) then flashed red, signaling an economy getting worse, rather than green, signaling an economy getting better. ..The professor then put the model back to mirror the contemporary world of 2005, and played into it various nostrums that had been recommended by politicians of left, right and centre, but mostly left. The dials generally flashed red. Then the professor provided another set of recommendations , and asked viewers who wished to play to tap in their own guesses on the consequent movement of key economics variables in the model. Those who got their guesses right to within a set error were told they had qualified for a second round of a knock-out economic guesstimators' world championship. Knockout competitions of this sort continued for viewers throughout the series of programmes.


In the second part of that first programme, the presenters dared to introduce political decisions into the game. They said that government-to-government aid programmes had been particularly popular among politicians during the age of over-government, but there was growing agreement that government-to-government aid was the worst method of hand-out. The excessive role played by governments in poor countries was one of the barriers to their economic advance, and a main destroyer of their people's freedom. Could anyone have thought it would be wise to give aid to President Mbogo?

The first questions to be asked in the next few programmes, said the compilers, were 1) which countries should qualify for aid? ; and having decided that, 2) up to what limits and conditions? ; and 3) through what mechanisms? They promised that later programmes after the first half-dozen would examine how any scheme could be used to diminish the power of governments and increase the power of free markets and free people.

---

Open Copyright Asserted by Macrae.nets for all co-edited weblogs, co-hosted open spaces and cafes of collaboration knowledge city & country. Excerpted from Chapter 6 of The 2024 Report first published in the UK 1984. Republished in American and French as The 2025 Report in 1985, and in German as The 2026 Report in 1986; soon used to provide the Swedish Charter for Online with The New Vikings. Further inquiries welcomed by communities with urgent needs through mailto:wcbn007@easynet.co.uk?subject=via

More Future History Co-scripts here

posted by ..., 12:54 PM  permalink

Some countries get grants and payments from the west, and squander them. Others use them wisely. It says a great deal about some of the nations affected by the December 26, 2004 tsunami that many have been able to make headway on rebuilding their economies. At Ton Zijlstra’s blog, he highlighted a report in the Netherlands about how donations were used—namely among local businesses in the affected region—and concludes with a very logical definition on what an economy is: ‘Economy after all is not about the material you use or its worth, it is primarily about the number of transactions created.’ posted by Jack Yan, 11:55 AM  permalink

I had been blogging on how certain banks were improving their service, such as the ANZ in New Zealand, and recent Medinge Brands with a Conscience award winner ABN AMRO/Banco. At Johnnie Moore’s Weblog (citing Zopa) I read that NatWest is going to remove clocks from its branches in the UK, to stop customers complaining about how long they have to wait in the queue (article in Rupert Murdoch’s The Sun).
   Which begs the question: how stupid does NatWest think Britons are? Would you not notice that you were still waiting a long time without the clock? Isn’t it simply more logical to work more efficiently?
   Now, there is going to be one less thing to look at at NatWest. The prettiest teller in the branch should watch out for an increase in perving. Beware the funny-looking chap with the pocketless trousers.
   I have never heard of less customer information being healthy. The NatWest brand will no doubt become weaker with more frustrated customers, as they make some of them late for appointments. posted by Jack Yan, 11:17 AM  permalink

Just spotted this on Phil Gerbyshak’s blog: a link to an advertising slogan generator. It’s as naff as heck, but it may be of use to some. If they improve on it and made it serious, it could become a threat to Madison Avenue. But not for a long time coming, if its present state is anything to go by.
   It does show, perhaps, the “commodification” of advertising. Slogans actually do have some effect on branding and on brand equity, more so than mission statements (according to a JY&A Consulting study I led), and they need to be chosen carefully for brand alignment. However, thanks to consumer cynicism, there are enough people undervaluing them—and a decent slogan generator may not be as far away as we think.
   After all, there are web templates now, and companies doing generic logos for less than $100—both being very dangerous to the optimal performance of an organization. Show me one person who can do a logo for an independent client (i.e. not himself or herself) for under $100 while considering all the brand values. posted by Jack Yan, 12:41 AM  permalink

Landor and Penn, Schoen & Berland have just done a survey of Americans’ top brands of 2005, and iPod has come out trumps. While I dislike intercapitalized words, and am always tempted to write Ipod, I have to admit these little gadgets have changed the world. I won’t get one, but they have changed the world.
   Cellphones changed people’s habits and most cellphone owners have altered their lives to serve the technology. But there was no single dominant brand—only in recent times have people begun saying, ‘I have a Nokia.’
   But from the start, people have been saying, ‘I have an iPod,’ and have been willing to change their music-buying and downloading habits as the gadgets’ slaves.
   And there are web sites devoted to the iPod—which were all too happy to break the news. Even I have been part of Podcasts.
   At iPodNN, the site reported on the study:

The 2005 ImagePower Newsmaker Brands Survey identified the high-profile brands in consumer’s [sic] minds as well as which brands suffered, and what Americans think their future holds for 2006.

   Nothing unexpected there. Nor was there anything unexpected from the other findings, which we’ve been saying for five years (excepting the Desperate Housewives and Lost bits):

The results also showed that Reality TV programs are “out,” while TV dramas are back “in.” Reality shows “Survivor” and “The Apprentice (Donald Trump)” were named among the top 20 losing brands in 2005, while dramas such as “Desperate Housewives” and “Lost” were named among the winning brands. …
   The survey also found that while SUVs continue to be top-sellers in the U.S., hybrid cars win the branding battle, as the Ford Escape hybrid makes the winners list and the Hummer ranks No. 6 on the losers [sic] list. “With the rise in gas prices and increased sensitivity to the environment, drivers realize the importance of hybrid cars and car manufacturers are responding by offering sleeker, more popular models in hybrid form” [said the survey.]

   But what was insightful was this—again unsurprising, but worthy of note given where the planet says it wants to head:

Oprah Winfrey earned tremendous positive appeal and placed third on the 2005 winning brands list. According to results, Oprah continues to generate positive buzz through her giveaways, book club, magazine and various successful extensions of her brand.

   Think of Oprah as positive and inclusive, two things which Martha Stewart’s brand was not. Oprah is the embodiment of a good brand, particularly with her interactivity (her show) and personal spiritual aims. May we even say that this is how all personal brands—or at least all brands founded on a person—should be?
   The full list has been published at USA Today, at this link, along with the predicted winners for next year (with Google leading). Note the surprises here, including Rupert Murdoch’s Fox, Extreme Makeover Home Edition, and Sirius Satellite Radio (if you need a qualifier—in this case your product category—how strong, really, is your brand?).
   As for next year, we think there are one or two major brands that are going to come from nowhere. Shhh. More in 2006. posted by Jack Yan, 10:49 PM  permalink

If you ever needed a sign of whether a country has made it past merely feeding its middle class, look at where the Volkswagen Beetle is sold.
   I don’t mean the Käfer or Fusca or Coccinelle, but the New Beetle, the fashion icon based on the old Golf platform.
   It’s more antiquated than the Golf, has less room than the Golf, costs more than the Golf and is less practical than the Golf.
   But when you have enough buyers for it who like a car for its charm and fashion statement (even though I thought it was démodé from the start—how can you glamourize something that came out of Third Reich policy?), and begin looking at emotive reasons for buying something (let’s face it, most of us in the west do), then life is no longer about merely surviving till the next day.
   The auto industry in that country is no longer about creating vehicles for mass mobilization like the Fiat 500 (Topolino and Bambina) or the Subaru 360.
   The latest country to join the New Beetle ranks is India, which gets the bug “unveiled” next month at its Auto Expo. Volkswagen is denying that it will sell the New Beetle, this time with a 2·5 litre engine, but you don’t bring cars to shows to whet appetites if you have no intention of selling them—at least not like this. If showcasing were the sole motive, Volkswagen of India could have done that in the late 1990s or early 2000s.
   The Passat, Phaeton and Touareg will also be shown—highly expensive cars for the everyday Maruti buyer, but the market is there for these vehicles, albeit as limited imports.
   I realize that there are Mercedes and BMWs in a lot of places in India, and the Merc W124 was even built there at one point, but even they serve a purpose (of status) without sacrificing a level of practicality. But the Beetle is, as far as I can tell, the most impractical little mass-marketed toy on which one can waste money and get appalling value—at least there it convincingly diverges from the original Hitler KdF-Wagen concept. posted by Jack Yan, 10:30 PM  permalink

Had a lovely chat to Johnnie Moore this morning—great to be in touch with another Medinge Group member and Beyond Branding author. When I look back at my nearly four years’ involvement with the group, the thing that impresses me most is the connections have endured. We are all involved in branding in a deep way, but what really connects us is the humanitarian aims that resulted in BB, and impact our everyday work. Many of us genuinely became friends.
   Johnnie’s latest trip to New Zealand is a flying visit and he’ll be back in winter soon, so we won’t get a chance to meet in person this time. But no doubt we’ll catch up somewhere on this planet—Medinge’s exclusive but worldwide membership means there are plenty of places we can go to in order to grab a coffee and chat to a local. And, of course, discover the next grand development in branding and, dare I say it, humanity. posted by Jack Yan, 10:16 PM  permalink

The 500th blog post at Beyond Branding. And I hope it’s meaning­ful.
   My friend David Freak, of the Freak fashion label in New Zealand, is known for recycl­ing fashion and showing them in unconven­tional venues, includ­ing gay night­clubs. But he is not alone: the Cubans have just done a show called the Art & Style fashion show, which has some recycled fashion, adorned on models and trans­vestites.
   I know for a fact that Cuba has more tradi­tional fashion shows, just as New Zealand does, but it is interest­ing that this item made the Asso­ciated Press news­wires.
   Cuba is a nation of tinker­ers—not surprising when materials are not in as great a supply as they are in the west. However, this may have height­ened Cuban inventive­ness. And it might even show a way forward, because not enough of the west con­serves in fashion.
   I applaud the show for being inclu­sive. Not only did it have recycled fashion, but local artists joined in.
   The west does shows like this, but includ­ing artists is usually done out of snobbery. I have a feeling the Cubans have little room, in a commun­ist nation, for snobbery. And my friend Mr Freak has little room for it, too.
   Another special designer is Gabriel Scar­velli (above), who also looks to a sustain­able prin­ciple in his haute couture. But he, too, is a rare example in the west—some­thing that Lucire tried to change (and has been changing) with its ‘Behind the Label’ series on environ­mental chic developed by model and social respon­sibility advocate Summer Rayne Oakes (top left).
   It’s fashion with a statement, and for a change it’s positive, inclusive, and human. We need more of it, please, whether it’s in Cuba or some­where else. And it’s a great way to celebrate 500 posts here at Beyond Branding. posted by Jack Yan, 8:59 AM  permalink

Yours truly has given the BBB a small nip–tuck for the New Year. Think of it as an annual model change like Detroit used to do: the content’s identical, it means very little, has little effect on the brand, but cosmetically it’s a little more au courant. posted by Jack Yan, 4:11 AM  permalink

As relayed by Beyond Branding’s own Johnnie Moore, a blog post by John Moore (no relation) at Brand Autopsy is here. Fans are making their own Star Trek episodes, based on the original time line. I’ve not too much to add to Johnnie’s thoughts here—this is brand evangelism at its best. Who says the brand is in the hands of the corporation? The twenty-first century (and the twenty-third) is about working with your audience.
   Incidentally, the special visual effects are great. posted by Jack Yan, 12:39 AM  permalink

I should not comment too much on personal branding, since it’s the province of my co-author Thomas Gad, but if you are a beauty queen, the sensible thing would be to have your own blog, as Miss Singa­pore, Shenise Wong, does.
   When my good friend Amber Peebles (pic­tured at left, in a photo taken by yours truly) went to Sanya in Red China as New Zealand’s represen­tative last year, there was an online compet­ition where the global public could vote for their favour­ite. A special award was given to the contes­tant who polled the best.
   It’s one of those “if onlys”. If she had a blog, and it were market­ed success­fully, people would get to know her. It’s the old idea of forming a connec­tion with your public. Natur­ally, she should have someone filter the strang­er comments out, but posting the daily life of a beauty queen, as Miss Singa­pore did, would have had plenty of support. When the votes were needed, she could have had a public to mobilize.
   After the competi­tion was over, and the crown handed to her succes­sor, the blog could serve to launch her career in whatever field she wanted.
   The blog world has changed things—but it is still “just a tool” that creates that old-fashioned connec­tion between two parties. Once upon a time, in the village, the vendor and the customer would have that very link. Today, tech­nology acts as the bridge, killing the concept of distance. But the idea goes a bit further than that. It makes each of us our own public rela­tions’ agent, and it can even create a career for our­selves.
   We might next see politi­cians blog next, to win votes—and to allow for real account­ability. posted by Jack Yan, 12:04 PM  permalink

A friend of mine records her, and sometimes her husband’s dreams, and this one came across as quite inspiring:

[He] dreamed last night that he was trying to get the people of the world to forget everything they previously knew about “time”. There would be no more dates, hours, years … He had convinced me easily but was going out into the world to try to get this to happen. Interesting, huh? He felt it would change so much.

It would certainly get us over the deadline mentality. Blogs are almost like that—unlike newspapers and magazines, there is no fixed schedule. In fact, some online magazines are the same. When they come out, they have passion, rather than fatigue, behind them, because they have been given the time to mature.
   It makes sense in many ways—already automakers are saying they need new models every six months because the novelty of a car doesn’t stay for two years any more. Remove the notion of time, and this would not matter.
   I know: some of you are thinking ‘Anarchy!’ Perhaps so—but I know that we have sacrificed trust for time in this day and age. And we keep saying that we want more trust in our business and personal relationships. If we weren’t so ingrained into an instant-gratification society, we might rediscover that level of trust once more.
   What else is preventing trust? posted by Jack Yan, 6:43 AM  permalink

Rediff has an article that suggests the world is catching on to what I have been saying for years: India is the hot invest­ment destina­tion. Indian-made products are better than Japanese ones, says Toyota chairman Okuda Hiroshi. You get a work­force that speaks English and has incentives to inno­vate, because the state does not come in to take your ideas. (Hint to Red China: wake up before you play catch-up.) posted by Jack Yan, 11:31 PM  permalink

Ford’s Mercury brand is targeting women. In a way, it makes sense: Mercurys are dressed-up cars and fancier than the Fords on which they are based. But they look the same as Fords. They have about the same de­precia­tion. A Ford grille runs horizontally and a Mercury grille runs vertically. Up-spec a Ford to Mercury equip­ment and it would cost the same.
   The ad campaign may increase short-term sales but I still say: make Mercurys different. Make the brand an American Alfa Romeo, where the cars are sportier and more powerful. If it’s a premium brand, treat it as such within the organi­za­tion (as it once did), not “just another” Ford division.
   Without dif­feren­tia­tion—one of the tenets of brand­ing—this campaign is going to be like any other “aimed at women” car campaigns, because the products are the same.
   What happens when Ford tries to go the premium route by increasing standard equip­ment? It’s a long-held Ford marketing method: start the new range off with basic models, and up-spec them each model year. Ford, too, is aiming to be Volks­wagen, if the badging on the cars and the overall styling are anything to go by. The result: the dif­feren­tia­tion could be lost.
   And if women make 80 per cent of car-buying decisions, which is Mercury’s claim, then wouldn’t everyone wish to target women? Why doesn’t Ford or Lincoln?
   To its credit, the company says Mercury is targeting a youthful, stylish psycho­graphic, rather than a gender—but that youthful­ness means web surfing. These are the consumers who have rejected the Saab 9-2X because they know it’s a Subaru in drag. Will they know Mercurys are Fords with falsies? They sure can see through a lot more than auto­makers, or anyone, give them credit for. In fact, is their known ad-cynicism being addressed?
   I say give women sportier, butch Mercurys—every ounce of research I’ve done suggests they like cars that are sexy to them, and that means shapes that aren’t curvy, but nicely chunky. I know that means expen­sive sheet­metal differ­ences. But globally, Ford develops more cars than it offers in the United States. I’d love to see the Ford Focus Mk II (C307) offered Stateside. If it wears Mercury (not Merkur) badges, then why not complement the existing range? Make it a little differ­ent—or differ­ent enough to show customers you’re serious about Mercury being a brand of its own. posted by Jack Yan, 11:04 PM  permalink