That Filter Problem

I start this post with a tip of the hat to my favorite political columnist and pundit, David Brooks. He writes for the New York Times, has authored several books, and has a regular commentary spot on the PBS Newshour. His wry humor and out-of-the-box thinking have entertained and educated me for many years.

In a recent interview, he used a line that had real resonance with me. Referring to the effect of political advertising, he stated that people use “an extremely thick filter” when evaluating these ads, and that it takes a lot to make an impact on the audience.

While this is undoubtedly true for people listening to political ads, it is also just as true for people listening to your business advertising. And for the same reasons.

To put it bluntly, people recognize that politicians have a lot at stake during a campaign, and therefore assume that much of the advertising they hear is full of purposeful miss-interpretations, half-truths, or just plain lies. History has proven this to be a pretty safe assumption.

To perhaps a lesser but none-the-less real extent, they feel the same way about business commercials. They have become jaded, sceptical, and extremely cautious about accepting what you say as factual.

You can't just say it, you have to prove it.

In this environment of consumers with “extremely thick filters”, just how much proof do you have to provide? There isn't a simple answer to this question but, in general, the more the better. However, this comes in conflict with another precept of advertising, “Keep it Simple”. There is only so much you can put into a short ad (print, radio, or TV) and the audience will only accept a limited amount of information.

• Sometimes, simply making a statement of fact will appear to the audience as proof:    “Our pizza has 20% more toppings than the competition.”
  
• Additionally, you can make a performance statement and invite your audience to see for themselves:  .“Come in, get a quote, and compare our prices to the competition.”
  
• Even better, if a little more cumbersome, is mentioning a positive statement from a 3rd party:   “The Daily Journal rates our service as the best in the region.”

Technically, none of these statements constitute “proof”, but if your target audience believes they are probably true, that will be enough to get past the “thick filter” and get them to respond.

Remember: Don't just say it, find a way to prove it.

 For more about David Brooks, click Here.

Comparative Advertising: Get Their Attention!

In my last post, I talked about how ALL advertising is comparative. Your audience listens to what you have to say, and compare that to what they know of the competition. Whether you like it or not, you are forced into this comparative position. The best response is to capitalize on it.

You can create a comparative campaign with three degrees of aggressiveness:

• Focus on the things you do well, and the competition doesn't.
  
• Focus on the things mentioned above, but state that the competition doesn't really do these things well, and suggest the audience check out the situation for themselves.
  
• Focus on the things mentioned above, and then state that the competition (which you identify) just doesn't do these things.

Lets evaluate these three approaches one at a time.

Focus on what you do well.

You should use this tactic at a minimum. Remember, the point of advertising is to be remembered. Bland statements like “been in business for 20 years” and “have friendly staff “ won't cut through the clutter. You need to draw attention to what you do that sets you apart.

Certainly, we can all think of examples where a company used a clever line in their ads to become memorable. My only objections to this approach are that:

• This tactic is more likely to work if the company is already well known, and
  
• It usually takes a lot of repetition (which is expensive) to drive this message home.

Consequently, my preference here is to become memorable with your content (what you do) rather than clever messaging (how you say it.) Either way, find a unique message that sets you apart, and hammer away at it.

Focus on what you do well, and state that the competition doesn't.

This is one notch higher on the aggressiveness scale, and has more impact. The general message is the same as above, but it is more direct. It doesn't just imply that the competition doesn't excel in the same way you do, it states that explicitly.

If this difference might not be apparent to your audience, and if you are confident in your position, you can suggest that they (your audience) check out the competition and find out for themselves. Frankly, unless the competitors mount a campaign in response, most of your audience won't follow-up on your suggestion. They will just take your word for it. They will assume you wouldn't make the claim if it wasn't true.

Focus on what you do well, state that the competition doesn't, and mention them by name.

This is only for the strong of heart, and needs to be handled professionally. If you really do things that customers find beneficial, and that the competition doesn't do, mention all of that in your ad.

For example: “We only use dried-cured peperoni on our pizza. Domino's, and Little Ceasar's don't.”
or “Our service department is open all day Saturday to assist you. Bill's Auto and the Auto Haus aren't.”

This is also only advisable for the nimble of foot, for the competition may respond in attack mode with their own ads, or they may just modify their practices to match yours. Either way, this ad approach can be very effective, even if it has only a short life-span.

Some advertisers object to this type of ad, because they believe it just gives the competition some free advertising. My opinion, however, is that the audience already knows who your competitors are, and your ads give you a chance to improve your position in the audience's mind.

The take-away here should be that all ads have a comparative element and, in order to be memorable, you shouldn't shy away from using that to your advantage.

It's the Comparison that Counts!

The Political Season is upon us. Perhaps it never really goes away, but it certainly is here in all its fury . My comments in this post are not about the politics, but rather the advertising. And, more importantly, the incorrect lessons that may be drawn.

The political ad is the ultimate in Comparative Advertising (today's subject.) Much of the advertising produced in this cycle takes direct, and critical, aim at the opponent:

• He will just raise your taxes.
• She won't support middle-class priorities.
• He is against creating jobs.
• She isn't really like us.

And with all of this harshness in our ears, we come to think of Comparative Advertising as a bad thing. Yes, this political form of the advertising science is bad. But Comparative Advertising in general is a wonderful tool, if used correctly, and the concept should be embraced.

In fact, this facet of advertising can't be ignored, because ALL ADVERTISING IS COMPARATIVE.

Every ad you run, even if it never mentions your competition, is comparative. This may not seem obvious at first, because the comparison doesn't really take place in the ad copy. It takes place in the head of the audience, the people you are trying to reach.

Whenever someone hears / sees your ad, they quickly digest who you are and what you do. Then, they slot you onto the hierarchical ladder of companies they know in your industry. This helps them simplify their choices. The top rungs of the ladder are their first choices when it comes time to buy. Obviously, getting you on one of those top rungs should be the goal of your advertising.

Who's in that position already, and how can you take their place?

People use many methods to determine which companies are on the top rung:

• The last company that provided a good buying experience.
• A company with a highly-creative ad campaign.
• The perceived “leader” in the industry.
• A company mentioned favorably by a colleague.
• The easiest company to buy from.
• And a dozen other reasons.

Every time you touch a prospect (with an TV/ radio ad, a flier, an e-mail, a handshake at the Chamber bar-b-cue, etc.), you get a chance to move up the ladder. And, even if you never mention the competition, the prospect is analyzing what you say and making that comparison for you.

Don't let the harshness of the political season and its horrible ads affect your advertising judgment. Recognize that your ads will treated in a comparative manner, capitalize on that fact, and build some positive comparisons into every contact opportunity.

Just how you do that is the subject of the next post. Until then, here's an idea:

Practical Tip of the Day:

• Look over your advertising material from the last year.
• Eliminate all of the bland verbiage like your name, location, contact info, and general platitudes.
• Make a list of what's left. That's what people (may) remember.
• Is there a pattern? Does it reflect the image you want? Will it move you up the ladder?

The Competition Doesn't Count!?!?!?

This old refrain popped up recently while I was interviewing for a consulting project. When asked about his competition and their impact in the marketplace, the business owner told me his philosophy: “The competition doesn't matter. Just do a good job, and the customers will come to you.”

I've heard this line before, and my response is 3 simple words:

Ba. Lo. Ney!

This attitude harkens back to a simpler, more gentile business environment. During the Eisenhower administration, maybe. But that was long ago.


Today, Your Competition Most Definitely Matters.

It sets the parameters for the conversation you have with your customers. Every one of your sales prospects has an idea of the products available in the market, and their price. Where do they get all of that information? From your competition.

• They listen to the ads,
• research their websites,
• and talk to their sales people.

If your competitors offer a similar product to yours for about $100, and you are priced at $120, your customers will be asking questions.

If the competitors have the product in stock, but you need 4 days to deliver, your customers will expect you to have a solid reason for doing things differently.

If the competition allows people to place their orders over the web, but you make them come in and talk to a sales person, your customers will want to know why.

The buying public won't allow you to operate within a vacuum. They'll evaluate everything you do in the context of what the competition does.

I read a great line recently: “we live in the age of transparency”. That is absolutely true in the sales environment. Your customers are familiar with your competition, their products, services and prices. And that frames the conversation when you begin your sales pitch.

So how do you operate effectively in this atmosphere? You need to arm yourself with two critical sets of information:

1. An understanding of your primary competition, and how they are viewed by the buying public.
2. Some key points of differentiation that will help your prospect see you in a different light, and perhaps justify increased margins.

Those two statements are simple to write, but might take a small business years to master. However, in them lies the difference between being a top contender in the marketplace and being just an also-ran. The competition sets the parameters of the game. How well-equipped are you for the challenge?

Practical Tip of the Day:

• Don't ignore the competition; embrace the challenge.
• Do a “shelf-space” analysis of your competitors, inside the head of your customer base. Do some extensive interviews with customers and prospects. (If you are the Boss, do this yourself. Don't delegate!)
• Figure out why you aren't considered at the top of the list, and develop a plan for the next 12 months.

HOWEVER, don't try to become #1 by mimicking the current #1. But more about that later.

Vive La Difference!

A technical term often used in marketing discussions is the USP: Unique Selling Proposition ( or, sometimes, Unique Selling Point).

It refers to something offered by the company that the competition can't/ won't/ doesn't match. It is a great way to get the buyer's attention.

Having a USP creates a superb marketing benefit, but only if it is actively promoted. Which brings us to today's topic:  Comparative Advertising.

I LOVE comparative advertising! I think it exemplifies what great marketing is all about.

The first time I remember seeing this approach was in a television ad for Wilkinson Sword Blades. This was back in the day when the US shaving market was dominated by Schick and Gillette. Wilkinson, the big British company, was trying to break into the market with its new, plastic coated blade. The commercial was simple: a small table, with 4 packages of blades from the major US companies. A hand appears, brushes the competitor's products to the floor, and places a pack of Wilkinson blades in the middle of the table. The announcer states that Wilkinson Sword makes the best blades anywhere, and the commercial ends.

The advertising community was shocked. Mentioning your competitors, particularly in a negative manner, just wasn't done. Complaints were made to the FTC (Federal Trade Commission), but they held that comparative advertising could benefit consumers and encouraged it, provided that the comparisons were “clearly identified, truthful, and non-deceptive.”

What constitutes “truthful and non-deceptive” has been debated in many court cases since, but that hasn't stopped the practice. Some great examples through the years include the famous “Pepsi Challenge” and, more recently, the very clever “Mac vs PC” ads. (Here is the Youtube link to those ads.)

The automotive companies make extensive use of this technique today, particularly in their truck advertising. The Ford ads with Dennis Leary, and the Chevy ads with Howie Long, both state their advantages over the competition. They tout their mileage, power, and towing statistics, and they name names. It is powerful, and persuasive.

So, why don't more companies use this tactic?

We can assume it's because:

• They wish to appear to be “polite”
• They don't want to mention the competition's name
• They haven't figured out a USP
• They don't want to encourage a counter-attack

In my admittedly-radical point of view, if you don't have a USP, you really shouldn't be wasting money on advertising. I am a big believer in addressing the customer in manner they consider relevant, and in answering the Big Question. As detailed in an earlier post, before someone makes a purchase from your company, they endeavor to find an answer to the Big Question: “Why should I buy from you, rather than 6 other companies that do the same thing”.

Comparative advertising certainly attempts to answer that question. Are your ads as effective?

Practical Tip of the Day:

• What sets your company apart from the competition?
• What do your customers like about your company, as compared to the competition?
• Do you promote those qualities in your advertising?