Riding the Wave of Linsanity

29 Feb

It’s hard to miss the wave of “Linsanity” that rolled into the New York area and swept Knicks fans and pun-lovers by storm.  The Harvard graduate’s rise from the NBA’s Development League to unexpected glory generated a global media frenzy and exposed how hungry New Yorkers have been for a reason to love the Knicks again. Marketers have swiftly responded to the media fury; number 17 Knicks jerseys appeared in mass quantities virtually overnight, restaurants and bars added Lin-themed items to menus (Lin-burgers, “Jeremy Lin-Mint” milk shakes and “Lin and Tonic”s) and a war has erupted over who can trademark (and profit from) the phrase “Linsanity.”   Just-as-quickly, some have made highly visible missteps during the fury (http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-jeremy-lin-yogurt-20120227,0,1130363.story).

Coming off the Knick’s loss to the Heat last Thursday, pundits speculate whether the wave of “Linsanity” will continue to roll into the second half of the Knicks’ season. They question whether Lin can handle his new role at the point of the Knicks’ offense and at the top of ESPN headlines.  Whether Jeremy Lin continues his ascent into the NBA Hall of Fame or ends up walking the all-too-familiar NY Knicks’ hall of shame, “Linsanity” has already put power back into the hands of NY Knicks fans.  The fact that Governor Cuomo leveraged ”Linsanity” to broker a resolution to the 48 day dispute between the MSG Network and Time Warner Cable, and end the blackout, is evidence of the clout that NY sports fans hold.

That magic spark that only NY fans and a buzzing Madison Square Garden can stoke is something priceless.  However, as long as marketers continue to ride the wave of “Linsanity” with caution, letting fans do most of the splashing, I think we can all agree to enjoy the high tide while it lasts.

Tags: , , , , ,

Top 10: Chocolate Brands

10 Feb

When it comes to America’s sweet tooth, classic chocolate brands have proven to stand the test of time.  The average age of the top 25 selling candies in the United States* is 50 years old and America’s favorite chocolate bars date back even further.

In ascending order here are America’s top selling chocolate brands:

10) Hershey’s Kisses
Annual sales: $100.2 million
Who makes it: Hershey
When kisses were first introduced to the American public in 1907, each kiss was individually hand-wrapped.  In 1921 as sales started increasing, the company moved to a machine assembly line.  Today in Hershey’s production facilities, 1,300 Kisses can be foil-wrapped in a single minute.

9) Milky Way
Annual sales: $129 million
Who makes it: Mars
Milky Way, launched in 1923, makes the claim to be the world’s first “filled” chocolate bar.  Created by Frank C. Mars, Milky Way was developed to mimic the flavor of chocolate-malt milkshakes which were popular at the time.  Outside North America, Milky Way is known as the “Mars” bar.

8) 3 Musketeers
Annual sales: $138.4 million
Who makes it: Mars
When Mars introduced 3 Musketeers in 1932, the 5 cent package contained a trio of candy flavors: vanilla, chocolate and strawberry.  The chocolate bar, with its nougat and whipped chocolate center was so popular that Mars dropped the other flavors.

7) Dove
Annual sales: $144.8 million
Who makes it: Mars
Dove’s hand dipped ice cream bars predate their stand alone chocolate bars.  Mars bought the Chicago-based ice cream company in 1986 and began making premium-priced, foil-wrapped Dove chocolate bars in 1991.

6) Twix
Annual sales: $172.4 million
Who makes it: Mars
The famous milk-chocolate coated caramel-topped cookie known as Twix was first introduced in Britain in 1967.  Mars brought the popular two-stick pack to the U.S. in 1979.  It was called “Raider” throughout much of Europe until 1991.

5) Kit Kat
Annual Sales: $198.9 million
Who makes it: Nestle
Kit Kat, the popular four-finger wafer bar was introduced in Britain in 1935 by candy producer, Rowntree after a note from an employee in the company’s suggestion box.  Hershey got licensing rights for Kit Kat in 1969.  It is currently produced and distributed by Nestle.

4) Snickers
Annual sales: $441.1 million
Who makes it: Mars
Snickers has been on the chocolate scene since 1930 when it became the Mars family’s second chocolate product.  The milk chocolate covered bar of nougat, peanuts and Carmel has since become one of the countries biggest selling candy bars.  It was named after the Mars family’s favorite horse.

3) Hershey’s
Annual Sales: $475 million
Who makes it: Hershey
Milton S. Hershey first started making the now famous Hershey’s chocolate bar in 1900, six years after the opening of his factory making chocolate to coat caramels.  A second variety, featuring chocolate and almonds, was added in 1908.  The bar went global during WWII when more than 1 billion were included in U.S. soldiers’ rations.

2) Reese’s
Annual sales: $516.5 million
Who makes it: Hershey
The Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups that we know today were started in 1923 by a former dairy employee of Milton S. Hershey who began selling “penny cups” of peanut butter dipped in Hershey’s chocolate.  Hershey bought the company 40 years later.  Reese’s Pieces, a spin off brand, got a major sales lift when extraterrestrial E.T. proclaimed them his favorite in the 1982 movie.

1) M&Ms
Annual sales: $673.2 million
Who makes it: Mars

The iconic M&Ms brand was named after its two inventors in 1941, Forrest E. Mars Sr. and R. Bruce Murrie.  It was originally packaged in a tube and came in only one variety, plain milk chocolate.  In 1954 peanut M&Ms were introduced and today there are more than a dozen varieties in the M&Ms portfolio, including M&Ms printed with personalized messages.

* The sales data from IRI, a Chicago-based consumer-market research company, are for the 52 weeks that ended Sept. 6. They encompass supermarkets, drugstores, convenience stores, and mass-market retailers, excluding Wal-Mart Stores (WMT).

Tags: , ,

The Changing Face of Facebook

6 Feb

Facebook’s announcement of their upcoming initial public offering was all over the news last week. This $5 billion initial offering places the value of the company at $75-$100 billion, a high figure for an enterprise with 2011 revenues of roughly $3.7 billion and profits of $1 billion. If it proceeds according to plan the service will likely undergo major changes in the near future. A couple recent developments illustrate why this is bound to happen.

Last week, Proctor and Gamble announced that it would lay off 1,600 staffers, including marketers, as part of a cost cutting initiative. CEO Robert McDonald believes that the company can afford to reduce ad budgets because he considers social media more efficient than the traditional channels P&G has previously relied upon. Unless you work in P&G’s marketing department, this approach seems reasonable, right? Maybe so, at least while a corporate presence on Facebook is free, but remember that FB earns most of its revenue through advertising fees. Its recent launch of “Sponsored Stories” indicates that the company is looking at ways to drive top line growth, challenging P&G’s assumption that this form of outreach will remain cheap forever. Are pay-to-play brand sites next?

Changes are afoot on the user side as well.
Perhaps you’ve noticed that unaffiliated web sites now allow you to log in using your Facebook credentials – simply sign into Facebook then connect to a myriad of sites without reentering your information. The reason for this is Facebook Connect, a universal API that allows Facebook users to share data seamlessly with third party web sites. While very convenient, privacy advocates are concerned that it this service gives the social network greater insight into your personal business.


The company noted in last week’s IPO filing that the Internet has 2 billion active users and that “we aim to connect all of them.” Facebook Connect assures that the network will not only connect them, it will gather a great deal of valuable information as well. How do they plan to leverage it?

As a public company, Facebook’s management will be under considerable pressure to ignite growth and justify its high valuations. We’ve detailed some ways that Facebook can further monetize the service; increasing ad rates, pay for play and further commercialization of proprietary data will affect advertisers, affiliates and users alike. Whether Facebook successfully morphs into a gateway platform with an ever-increasing user base remains an open question. However, by raising $5 billion in new capital it appears clear that they are going to give it a shot.

So, will it work? Let us know what you think.

Tags: , , , , ,

Hershey’s: Branding an Icon

2 Feb

Having all grown up a diehard Hershey’s fans and never losing our love for the iconic chocolate bar (with almonds of course!) getting the opportunity to do branding work for them was a real treat.

Challenged with a series of global initiatives, Hershey’s HR department sought to strengthen its identity and create a united voice from which to serve up its global communications platform. After a thorough exploratory we assessed that the a new identity needed strong emotional ties to Hershey’s consumer brand as well as to internal corporate values. The result? A logo and tagline that was unmistakably Hershey.

Whether you’re rebranding an iconic company like Hershey or starting from scratch, we’ll help you find the right ingredients. Please give the brand chefs at i3 a call. We’ll cook up a recipe for your success.

Tags: , ,

What do Kodak and SOPA have in common?

19 Jan


Pick up a paper or turn on the news and you’ll likely come across the two big stories of the week – pending Congressional Internet IP legislation (SOPA, PIPA) and Kodak’s Chapter 11 filing. Both stories are big news in their own right, but is there a common theme between them?  First, a little background:

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, and Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate are intended to combat piracy of copyrighted materials by permitting the U.S. government to block access to sites it deems to be infringing. Opponents of this act fear that passage will lead to censorship of the net and greatly limit the free flow of information.

Kodak, once the dominant player in the U.S. photographic and printing market, began to see its position erode with the advent of digital technologies in the 1990’s. The company’s failure to maintain a leading position led to its 2004 removal from the Dow Jones Industrial Average index and its ultimate bankruptcy filing on January 19th. While today Kodak furiously attempts to reinvent itself, its future as a going concern is anything but certain.

Both stories underscore the reality that rapid acceleration of change has undermined traditional methods of doing business. Rather than adapting to new technologies, the recording and motion picture industries spent years fighting against enabling technologies through traditional advocacy and advertising. Their efforts, which led to the impending votes on SOPA/PIPA, now appear derailed by opponents communicating through social media channels and by the voluntary protests/blackouts of Internet companies directly impacted by this legislation.

Likewise, while its competitors committed to adoption of digital technologies, Kodak stuck with an existing business model and only made tentative moves into these new markets once they became established. As a result, companies like Nikon, Canon, Fuji and others captured preeminent positions in the digital photographic market and HP and Epson in the digital printing market. By 2012, the company that once controlled 90% of U.S. photographic film sales was a shell of its former self.

In both cases, new technology and approaches trumped the old ways of doing business. Failure to adapt led them to cling to business methods that worked at one time but are ineffective today. Their managements did not recognize the disruptive changes affecting their businesses early on. Consequently, they failed to deliver the products and services that their customers were demanding.

While the business environment is always evolving, the pace of change today continues to accelerate, amplifying the impact of strategic missteps and compressing time available for recovery. Some may view this as a time to “adapt or die” but I prefer to remember that with change comes opportunity.

Keep an eye out for the next disruption in your industry; it is probably closer than you think.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Achieving strategic goals: You could be your own worst enemy

16 Jan

In this economy, reaching your strategic goals is harder than ever. Often this is due to external factors outside of your control – like reduced staff size, stiffer brand competition etc. The deck seems stacked against you, right? Well…chances are you are actually more likely to fail because of internal factors. The two biggest being, loss of focus and loss of morale.

How can I keep this from happening to my best laid strategic plans?

  1. Be a proactive leader and lead by example. You’ll need to actively engage and keep employees motivated.
  2. Avoid flip-flopping: Don’t lose confidence in your well planned strategic direction and change course.
  3. Be realistic: Set strategic goals that can actually be attained. Too much of a stretch will create frustration.
  4. Practice strategic policing: Stay on target by regularly reviewing your tactics.

Essentially, keep it simple, execute using these four guidelines and your team will stay focused and inspired. Success should soon follow.

Tags: , , ,

← Older Entries