MarketingInsideOut.com

A new start-up called Pudding Media is offering free VoIP (PC-based telephone calls) if users allow the company to listen in on their conversations and serve targeted ads based on keywords in the conversation.

Here’s how it works: The voice recognition software monitors the calls and based on what it hears, it will push the ads to the subscriber’s computer screen while he or she is still talking. A conversation about movies will result in ads for new films.

This one has a really tough road and I don’t think the odds are in its favor:

First, although consumers do flock to free web-based services, the concept of free VoIP calling is not new. Free, or nearly free, PC-phone calls are already available from dozens of companies, including Skype. The difference between 2 cents a minute and 0 cents a minute (for SkypeOut users) is almost negligible.

Secondly, for Pudding Media, being known as the VoIP provider with the most Big Brother tendencies puts it at a major disadvantage. So, except for people trying the service to check out the targeted ads (of which there will be many after today’s NYTimes article), users will be freaked out by the idea that someone (or in this case “something”) is listening in.

Pudding argues that their new technology is no different than that used by Google who scans in-boxes of G-mail users to tailor fit the ads they provide to them. But to most of us there’s a difference between written and spoken…we all know that most web activity is monitored in some way, yet anything that “listens” to voice communications feels very CIA-ish and way too close for comfort. Pudding says the keyword information is discarded after every call, but it will be up to consumers to decide whether or not that provides any reassurance. That’s a big stumbling block to get past.

And lastly, advertisers will be freaked out by freaked out consumers and the potential consumer backlash.

Google weathered the backlash when they launched the G-mail advertising technology, but they had street credibility already. Pudding is a start up. Much tougher position.

Some hate it. Like Slate.

Some love it. Like David Burn over at AdPulp.

I’m with David. I love it. Great concept and acting. It’s witty and perfect for the audience it targets.

And judging from my experience (yes I tried one)…it’s reality based. But just the crumbs part. The taste is…well…absent. As an Oreo double-stuff fan, it just didn’t measure up.

Wal-Mart rolled out a new slogan last week developed by its new agency, The Martin Agency —”Save Money. Live Better”—after having used “Always low prices” and the smiley for 19 years. And thankfully, it seems to be backing way off recent attempts to portray its stores as more upscale [that seemed like a major attempt at an illusion even David Blaine couldn't pull off]. Instead, promoting an image of what middle-class families can achieve by saving money at the registers. According to a quoted study [sponsored by Wal-Mart] done by Global Insight, it showed the average family saved $2,500 a year by shopping at Wal-Mart.

“Live Better,” reminiscent of Lance Armstrong’s cancer survival “Live Strong” line, is Wal-Mart’s attempt to change the story for consumers. Wal-Mart executives are saying that the new line is not just a slogan, but a four word mission statement for the retailer.

The new TV campaign is well produced, insightful and does incorporate much more of a warm and fuzzy emotional tone into its advertising than in the past, in an attempt to boost sagging sales. However, the move from fairly benign messaging [i.e. Always low prices] to putting the consumer at the center with the new line that adds “live better” [the benefit of saving money on everyday items] is actually a bold move [despite the rather soft sell in the commercials].

Think about it…publicly trashing and bashing Wal-Mart for turning small towns into ghost-towns, questionable hiring and benefits practices and contributing exponentially to the trade imbalance with China has damn near become a national sport — not to mention the nauseating coverage of Roehm-gate in the advertising industry. Yet, we’ve all felt fairly far removed from how they do business and thusly felt justified in commenting on their competitive, aggressive and sometimes questionable business practices. Confronting the consumer head on in the positioning with the fact they are the real beneficiary of the low prices, and the reason Wal-mart does what it does the way it does it, makes the consumer take some responsibility — whether they want it or not.

Focusing on the consumer as the beneficiary forces a change in the tenor of potential Wal-Mart bashing. It has to, because it’s no longer them focused, but us. And as much as I didn’t want to like the campaign [because it's more fun to bash Wal-Mart], I think it’s right on the mark from a marketing perspective. The whole position centers on the very simple premise: consumers want/demand a good deal…a low price for the things we need to buy so we can spend our hard-earned money on other things.

While done with a soft touch, the campaign gets at the hypocrisy in the anti-Wal-Mart sentiment. The fact is, I look on the Internet to find the lowest price I can when I buy airline tickets, book hotel rooms, merchandise and more. I buy from just about anyone anywhere with a click of a mouse. Don’t you? Do I look into the business practices of all the companies I buy from? No. Do you?

The visual concept of the Sprint Speed TV spots are a good match for the concept and give more depth to the brand promise and benefits. The production effect is terrific and the spots are entertaining to watch.

They’ve done a good job leveraging it online as well at the SprintAhead.com site where you can see all the spots and create an e-card that uses the stop-action technique. But for me, the real impact and leverage comes from a somewhat stealth Sprint site, waitless.org, that has popped up giving people tips on how to save time in their daily lives.

The slogan at the top of the page says: “Fast-forward through the boring parts of life.”

Then it provides a daily video called a “Sprintcut.” Like one called “Speedy Sorbet,” which shows you how to make sorbet with a scoop of orange juice, ice and a couple of zip lock bags. But the “How to peel an egg” is my favorite.
The various videos claim to save you “days” of your life, or as Sprint claims: “Turn tedious tasks into fleeting moments with Sprintcuts — tips that’ll refund your time and amaze your friends.”

Of course nothing comes without warnings.

The fine print says that Sprintcuts should not be attempted at home, but “Oh wait, that’s what they’re for! But seriously … Sprint is not responsible for the outcome of any attempted time-saving maneuvers. Actual time saved may vary.”

The effort is well integrated and well done. And the technique is very cool, but I wonder about the strength of the message and whether it will stick this time. Granted it’s light years better than Sprint’s last effort, “power up”, but this is the third rebranding effort for the carrier in as many years.

Good for Cramer-Krasselt. I’m thrilled to hear the news about their win of the Porsche business.

They’re on a roll…Zantac then Bissell and now Porsche…a great winning streak after getting screwed by CareerBuilder in February. You got to love when you tell a client, who puts you into review for no good reason, to fuck off and have it help your new business efforts. Like Peter Krivkovich, CEO of C-K did when he was told by CareerBuilder that they were going into review because the superbowl spot didn’t make the USA Today poll of favorites… “There are a few times in your life when you have to tell someone to fuck off and mean it,” Mr. Krivkovich said in an interview shortly after the memo leaked.

I think Krivkovich has real conviction and guts… something very admirable in the ad business that is way too willing to whore itself for the buck. I cheered when he told CareerBuilder where they could put their review, but “many agency and marketing executives thought Mr. Krivkovich’s public outburst would make a bad impression on prospective clients who might be reluctant to sign up a potentially volatile partner that might embarrass them when the relationship eventually deteriorated.”

In an AdAge article this morning about C-K’s successes, Porsche seem to cheer him on as well.

“If anything, it was a positive,” said David Pryor, VP-marketing at Porsche Cars North America, which awarded C-K its creative and media accounts last week. “I had a lot of respect for them standing behind their work and conviction. At Porsche, we want an agency that has conviction and passion.”

Congrats to C-K!

How do you get drunks to avoid getting behind the wheel? Well…in Germany they came up with The Piss-Screen – a peeing game that involves a video driving simulation that makes its point and encourages drunk urinaters to take a cab. The video game screen above each urinal starts playing as soon as someone begins to pee. Swing your stream right, and the car goes right, swing left….you get the idea. The more blasted you are, the slower your response, reinforcing the effects of alcohol to the gamer. The game ends in a horrific crash-sequence, emphasizing the point.

Great idea.

Created by Saatchi & Saatchi, Germany

Tonight while having a glass of wine with a friend, we happened to glance at the TV during a commercial, and she proceeded to rant about how the spot was a total crock. It was one of those “Life Takes VISA” spots where the world of commerce is proceeding at a smooth clip until one customer in line pulls out cash — or heaven forbid — a check. Then the music goes off key, other customers in line gawk and smooth is interrupted with awkward.

Sam was ticked and ranted that the spot was condescending. I argued that it was insightful and, while a bit dramatic and over the top, it is based on a kernel of something many customers experience. Including me.

Recently in a check out line at Target, I was behind a women who wrote a check. And she didn’t start writing it (she didn’t even get her checkbook out of her purse) until the checker had completely finished ringing up everything. So I stood there and waited. And waited. And waited some more as the women neatly put her wallet and checkbook back in her purse. Blocking the POS machine. Meanwhile the checker had almost finished my order and was giving me that eye roll look. And the women was still standing there organizing her purse. And while I didn’t go as far as tapping my foot or anything, I’m pretty sure I gave my husband that “how annoying” look as well. And I definitely remember complaining as we left the store about how some people are soooooo slow.

Until tonight I never gave the campaign much thought because I inherently got and connected with the … “because money shouldn’t slow you down” premise. (I’m a very impatient person.) Yet the thought that Visa has the audacity to claim it has become “better money” because of convenience and security… and saying that using cash is inferior is…well arrogant.

So Sam, chalk one up to you for pointing it out. But next time, I pick the wine.

Excellent concept, albeit a bit creepy. Via Ads of the World. Agency: Scholz & Friends, Berlin, Germany

I would bet you won’t get an argument from Geico about the value of advertising.

The auto insurer that has increased its ad spending a whopping 75% since 2004, ranks No. 1 in new-customer acquisition and is the only top insurance brand to achieve double-digit growth during the past four years — 13.1%, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2007 Insurance Shopping Study released in late June.

Spending a tracked $501 million in media, nearly twice that of any other player in its category, Geico ranks No. 1 in new-customer acquisition at 5.8%, followed by Progressive at 4.4%, State Farm at 4.2% and Allstate at 4.2%, according to the study, which surveyed 6,050 recent shoppers to track behaviors and motives for switching auto insurance over the past 12 months.

It’s working for them. They have over 90% awareness and people love their advertising. Including one very important person who probably has a lot of influence over their ability to keep spending on advertising — Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire-Hathaway (GEICO is a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway).

In a Wall Street Journal article titled “How a Gecko Shook Up Insurance Programs” (January 2, 2007), Warren Buffett is quoted as saying, “I love the advertising. (The ad growth is) sustainable as long as I am willing to write the checks. And I love writing them.”

Earlier this week PepsiCo starting pouring money into their latest brand launch — Diet Pepsi Max. As much as $55 million will be spent launching this brand geared to men 25 to 34 who like the buzz of drinks like Mountain Dew, but are starting to become concerned about their weight.

Targeted to desk jockeys battling the midday blahs, it’s being positioned as a diet energy drink to rouse men out of the 2pm slump. Their goal is to try and achieve a share of 3% to 5%, which would be pretty impressive if they can do it — but I would think that’s going to be an uphill battle. As far as I know, no one in the cola category has cracked the code on how to really appeal to men with diet drinks.

It seems like a tough challenge on two fronts — the concept of a diet soda to men and against other well-established, entrenched energy drinks. But at least PepsiCo is putting some big bucks behind it.

Pepsi’s challenge is unlike the pretty easy and logical product extension Coke did with Diet Coke Plus (calorie-free with added vitamins and minerals) in March. In that case, the prevailing mindset of the female drinker is “I’m already drinking a ton Diet Coke every day anyway, I might as well get something out of it.”

Whereas Diet Coke Plus could cannibalize a good share of Diet Coke business, it’s less likely Diet Pepsi Max, if they manage to truly resonate with men, will cannibalize the traditional Diet Pepsi share (which I would assume is also largely female).

I bought one tonight and to me…it tastes like Diet Pepsi and didn’t do much for me. But given that I drink at least one pot of coffee every morning and almost always have a glass of ice tea at hand after noon, I’d suspect I have a constant caffeine high anyway and wouldn’t notice any uptick.