Comments for Why Blog

Comment on 9th Annual Meridian Group Q by Tracey

Tracey — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:50:09 +0000

Next a recipe book….but don’t tell all the secrets!

Comment on Maximum Disclosure, Minimum Delay by Mike Lopez

Mike Lopez — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:39:37 +0000

Terry,

As a TV/Online journalist, I would encourage you to eliminate the phrase “as soon as all the facts have been verified”. These days, organizations cannot wait that long. I would counsel you to address the issue immediately, on-air and online, because, to put it simply, the fact you haven’t verified all the facts, is, empirically, a fact. Sometimes “I/We don’t know” is a fine answer. Get out in front, within minutes, or you’re playing catch up.
Just my opinion!

Comment on STIHL Chain Saw Featured in Maxim by US MARINE

US MARINE — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:06:51 +0000

Anybody know her name?

Comment on STIHL Chain Saw Featured in Maxim by yeah

yeah — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 02:57:23 +0000

What is the name of this model?

Comment on STIHL Chain Saw Featured in Maxim by Stihl Mechanic

Stihl Mechanic — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:22:03 +0000

Nice!
That is almost as good as the Sarah Palin shot holding a Stihl chainsaw.

Comment on STIHL Chain Saw Featured in Maxim by Lee McKnight

Lee McKnight — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:46:16 +0000

Now that will sell some chain saws, I’ve no doubt.

Lee- http://www.rswus.com

Comment on The Roosevelt Hotel in Gotham Mag by Kim

Kim — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:06:38 +0000

Love it!

Comment on WHY DO WE “Q”? by Jenniei Capps

Jenniei Capps — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:00:44 +0000

Thanks Joe! The Q was WONDERFUL and it was an honor to be involved in such a special event…the talent is endless and I cannot wait for the cole slaw recipe! Thanks for having me, Jennie

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by abby

abby — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:01:39 +0000

brand marketing and direct marketing = two very different things. Currently being on top doesn’t mean you’ll stay there – or top of people’s minds. Phone to sell, shmone to sell – it was clear to me Google’s direction was to begin to be a part of someone’s life, not just sell them something. Storytelling is powerful.

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by JoMama

JoMama — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:07:46 +0000

I named Google as one on my winner’s list because it supported their brand promise and they did it without audio. Also think about how efficiently they used the production budget. The spot could have been produced for under $10,000 even though it probably cost them a half million. What do you think some of the real losers spent? Millions…

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by Bob Sanders

Bob Sanders — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:20:19 +0000

Simple Michael,

They recognize that sooner then later someone will come up with a Google killer, what with the increasing competition and more clutter in the marketplace they finally reconized that they had better start branding themselves.

After many years of dismissing branding as a waste of money, they go and pour millions into a pure branding ad.

http://battellemedia.com/archives/005116.php

Some would say it was still a waste, but think of all the good will generated with this simple beautiful 30 sec spot. I think it is a brilliant move on their part.

While we may never know the result of this on the human brain, generating a feeling of emotional connections, the ahh…, warm and fuzzy feelings and linking it with your brand is a great move. How many people just think of Google is a place to go for search, with no emotional connection and would be more then willing to switch if there is something better… now they may have an emotional link to the brand Google, and without knowing why will stick a bit closer with Google over time – resisting change.

Google is smart. Scary smart, and this proves what great marketers have known for many years. Branding works.

Bob

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by Paul Dierksen

Paul Dierksen — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:57:33 +0000

Hey Joe,
I guess the Letterman spot wasn’t considered a commercial., although it seemed like CBS was plugging his Show.

You know, the one where Dave is seated next to Oprah on a couch who is flanked by Leno. Munching on a stale Dorrito Dave says” This is the worst Super Bowl Party ever” That was it, but it was great !
-PD

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by Terry Kelley

Terry Kelley — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:47:41 +0000

I liked the Google ad as well in my top 5. It really showed the brand’s capabilities. Younger generations aren’t using Google as often as we are.

I liked the Audi piece because of the marraige of the green space along with the brand reoutation.

Didn’t quite understand the placement of the back-toback underwear ads.

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by Felicia

Felicia — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:46:04 +0000

You mean the Doritos spot didn’t make your top pick?

Also, maybe the Queen didn’t kill it, but the singing the entire night was a horror in my opinion!

Comment on The best and worst of super bowl 44 spots by Michael Laborde

Michael Laborde — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:02:45 +0000

Nice post, but I can’t for the life of me understand how Google winds up a winner in anyone’s list.

They are by far tops in search with over 70% of the market and it isn’t like people have no idea what they do, and for the most part do the best. I doubt they will be relinquishing that title to Bing/Yahoo/As Jeeves [sic] any time soon. So why spend millions of dollars to sell something so synonymous that it’s now a description for that specific thing. People Google with Bing, just as they Xerox on Canon copiers, just as they use adhesive strips to Band-Aid.

This isn’t even considering the target audience for the Super Bowl. Those watching don’t care about finding Chocolates in Paris at this time, much less any time. Maybe finding the best bars with the best beer, or the best deals on Ed Hardy t-shirts. It came off a bit pretentious in a time where everyone is letting their drunk freak flag fly.

It’s a beautiful commercial in a different situation, but don’t they have a phone to sell or something? It’s mind boggling they went for this under this circumstance. Feel free to help me out with a decent rationale to this. Thanks.

Comment on Where’s my Sunday NY Times? by joe

joe — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:39:46 +0000

How do I find out why my sunday times was not deleivered

Comment on Sarcasm. Punctuated. by Erin

Erin — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:44:36 +0000

I love this! I think I may have to download the punctuation…

Comment on 2010 – The year we make contact by Dave Stearns

Dave Stearns — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:32:17 +0000

Read last night that it is est. that it will cost at most $350 to produce the tablet and with a large scale operation the cost to produce will decline. Would be nice to make that kind of prifit on our work.

Comment on Top Ten Marketing Tips for 2.10 by FFcommunicator

FFcommunicator — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:54:34 +0000

Here’s ten more: 10 things you pay for from traditional marketing agencies. http://www.famefoundry.com/1447/10-things-you-pay-for-from-traditional-marketing-agencies

@FFcommunicator
Fame Foundry
Charlotte Website Design

Comment on Is Walmart taking over Target’s position? by Joe Takach

Joe Takach — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 17:16:22 +0000

OK, maybe Target is just bi polar or they don’t know the true meaning of integration…. In last week’s People Magazine they 20 page slick full color insert; beautifully designed, perfectly aligned with their brand promise, big product shots with little prices. Very tarje’. So does this mean the newspaper inserts and the magazine inserts are being directed and executed by two different groups. Is it the same old story that the agency is too good to get their hands dirty in newspaper – something that’s been happening for years with automotive. Bottom line is that consumers are consuming both the Jekyl and Hyde of Target. BTW, I do not regularly read PEOPLE, but I ran out of local newspaper before I ran out of coffee one morning (I swear!)