Drive-thrus - convenience or laziness?

If you drive around our country for any length of time, you cannot help but notice the number of drive-thru establishments that surround us. We no longer have to get out of the cars for many goods and services:

Banking, fast food, dry cleaning, coffee, oil changes, car washes, post office, pharmacies, donuts, goodwill, salvation army, are a few businesses that offer drive-thru service. I have also heard of drive through liquor stores, drive through blood donation, and other services designed for consumer convenience.

As I ride by, I wonder if these services are really convenient, or are we getting too lazy to park our car and walk a few hundred feet to obtain these goods. I become more curious when I see 10 cars at the McDonald's drive-thru, and find no one inside the restaurant. The drive-thru obviously takes more time than going inside, so where is the convenience? Is it the wear and tear on the car as you have to turn the car off and then start it back up? I am not a mechanic, but I don't believe that this is too stressful for a car. And the idea of sitting in a car to get a dozen donuts illustrates the height of laziness. (are these donuts just to hold us over before we get to work?)

What next, drive-thru appendectomies? Pick up your new prosthesis at window 2? Will someone shoot food through our window as we drive by at 60 mph? Let's bring back the old A & W root beer stands, where you were served your food by someone on roller skates. At least then you could sit and eat your meal without negotiating traffic between bites.

Although the businesses listed above leave some questions in my mind regarding their convenience, it is apparent through their use that they are fulfilling some felt need in the market. Whether these services are beneficial to consumers, the perception of this convenience seems to be driving businesses to develop these models and consumers are reinforcing this behavior by taking advantage of these drive-thrus.

One business model that comes to question is a relatively new opening near my house. Until last year, there was a small shack on the side of the road that was called Joe to Go and was a drive-thru coffee shop. Although this seemed like a reasonably good idea for a business in a very high traffic area, this business closed after several years of operation. The building sat empty for several months before a new business opened at the end of last year. This business has tried to capitalize on the enormous pet market by selling health food and other services (a doggy wash?) catering exclusively to pets. I have no doubt that there is plenty of money being spent on pets to include these health foods and a washing service. But I am amazed that this business owner has developed this idea as a drive-thru. Again, is this an attempt to create a sense of convenience (an alternative to Pets Smart, or is it just more proof that Americans are becoming lazier? It appears to be another example of a marketer trying to capitalize on trends that are working in the marketplace. For this particular product only time will tell if this is this is the case.

Can robots really dream?

In an attempt to be creative and witty, marketers are increasingly facing criticism from activist groups concerned about how a certain group or class is being portrayed in commercials. Whether it is gay and lesbian groups concerned with how gay people are represented in a Snickers commercial, or the Society for the Preservation of Leprechaun Lore suing an advertiser for suggesting that a leprechaun was incapable of defending himself, more and more groups are rebelling against ads that they claim are detrimental to their particular societal group.

A recent ad for GM portraying a despondent robot in a dream sequence in which he commits suicide was protested by the New York based American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. In their view "It was inappropriate to use depression and suicide as a way to sell cars. " Although GM initially defended its actions and refused to change the ad, they have since conceded and agreed to change the ending.

Although I would agree that depression and suicide are not topics that should be taken lightly, can consumers not distinguish between fantasy and reality? After all, this was a robot that was portrayed, was it not? Can robots actually commit suicide? Do they have the ability to dream? These ads are not necessarily based in reality, they are commercials, not scientific discoveries. Or perhaps the marketers missed an opportunity here. Should a pharmaceutical company have used this ad to promote an anti depressant?

To illustrate this point, a response was published on a website called autoextremeist (http://autoextremist.com/page2.shtml). In this article a different perspective is given, this one from the mind of the robot. The robot is asked his opinion on the backlash, and in general what life is like as a robot. The robot gives us some insight into his psyche, and how this ad has changed his life. The last part of this interview, I believe sums up this blog pretty well:


" Q: Any last words for our humanoid audience, Ricky?"

"A. Yeah, how about it's only a frickin' TV commercial? You humanoids need to stop allowing a few with a cause (noble, or otherwise) to adversely affect the lives of the majority. I mean, we got our causes too, man - but we don't go around shoving them down each other's throats. And you humanoids used to have a sense of humor too. What the hell happened to that? Now you spend so much time wandering around trying not to offend anyone that no one can't get anything done out of fear of pissing somebody off. You've become a race of touchy-feely, spineless, worrywarts who can't get shit done without having a group hug and discussing your feelings, and that's a bunch of bullshit - in any language. Grow some stones back, have your spine removals reversed, and for crissakes if you're lucky enough to have a point of view, stick to your guns and tell the special interest groups to go take a flyin' uh, well, you know what I mean. I gotta run, time to go back to work."

IRS promotes Usury?

In an effort to take advantage of and promote use of electronic filing for tax returns, the IRS has been accused of assisting tax preparers to gouge consumers through the use of extremely high interest rates on tax refund loans. The IRS is providing The Debt Indicator Service that allows tax preparers (lenders) to verify a potential refund for a taxpayer. Essentially, this amounts to a free credit check for the lender to determine if this refund will be available to pay back a loan given to the customer based on the anticipated refund.

Preying on consumers desire for immediate cash, preparers have marketed this as a value added service through promotion of instant gratification (24 hour turnaround). As the fees for this service are deducted from the refund, the consumer does not feel the impact. Their desire to get the cash now outweighs the financial ramifications of this transaction. The price associated for obtaining this cash is not regulated and has allowed many companies to turn a handsome profit with very little risk. Based upon prices for RALs (Refund Anticipation Loans), a consumer can expect to pay about $100 in order to get an average refund of about $2,150. This fee includes a fee for a "dummy" bank account to be used to receive the refund from the IRS to repay this loan. The effective APR on this loan would be 178%. (A number that is not revealed nor discussed with the taxpayer). Depending on the amount of the refund, this % may be as high as 700%.

The IRS views this service as a way to allow tax preparers to make these loans, thus encouraging mostly low income taxpayers to file electronically. According to their data, 78% of RAL applicants in 2004 had adjusted gross incomes of less than $35,000. These exhorbinant interest rates are thus being applied to those who can afford them the least.

Although consumers certainly have the ability to determine these rates, and can theoretically make an informed decision, this appears to be American capitalism at its best (or worst). Companies providing this service are targeting consumers who are more prone to quick cash loan offers. These consumers also make use of rent-to-own credit services, payday loan services and pawnshop services.

Other companies have also taken advantage of this IRS service to provide these loans for cars, and big ticket appliance purchases. They have realized the opportunity to market to consumers for these purchases, while having the ability to minimize their risk through the debt indicator service.

As for the role of the IRS, this debt indicator service may be helping them to reach their targets for electronic filing, but this self serving arrangement may only help to perpetuate the animosity for their organization in the minds of consumers. In addition to the obvious issues from this, there is also a concern from consumer groups regarding their privacy. The IRS is releasing information to these companies regarding a consumers personal financial situation. For example, if a taxpayer owes child support subject to withholding from a tax refund, he/she would not qualify for an RAL. Suddenly, this information is not private, but available to these lenders.

With a recent push from consumer groups, some of the more reputable tax preparers such as H&R Block have reduced some of the fees associated with this service, but not all have followed suit. It would appear that this type of program will continue as long as consumers are willing to pay the price, or until the government steps in and tries to regulate this type of behavior. Until then, these companies are filling a need in the marketplace and will continue to profit from their services.

For more information:

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/news/20030127a1.asp

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/hr_block_ral.html

http://www.consumerlaw.org/initiatives/refund_anticipation/content/debt_indicator_pressrelease.pdf

Their parents would be so proud

Is there a correlation between the clothes that one wears and the weather to which they are exposed? From a purely common sensical point of view, it would appear that the answer would be obvious. But an observation of young people in this area may prove that it perhaps the answer is not as obvious.

With the recent cold spell that we have experienced here in Northern Indiana, I have been surprised to find students on campus who have not been informed that wind chills below zero are considered to be cold. On one of my short drives around campus last week I had to avoid a skateboarder who was skating around campus ( on the main roads covered with snow). Although this in itself seemed odd, his wardrobe was even more puzzling; he was wearing only a pair of shorts and a tee shirt.

I relayed this story to my wife who commented that this subject had been the topic of a discussion with a women's group to which she belongs. Specifically, these women were amazed at the number of students in our neighborhood waiting for their bus, dressed as if it were the middle of May, and not the middle of February. (Of course, these were not the children of any of the adults in this conversation.)

Not to be outdone, and almost on cue, on my way home last night I almost ran into (literally) another student on campus significantly under dressed. His attire consisted of gym shorts and running shoes (sans shirt), although he appeared to be carrying a jacket of some sort. The outside temperature at the time was 8 degrees (without the wind chill factor).

A recent news story highlighted a family with a unique tradition for Super Bowl Sunday related to this. Apparently to show their enthusiasm and vigor during the Super Bowl, their tradition was to run around the block of their neighborhood in only a pair of shorts (no shoes, no shirt). The weather during this years game in this family's neighborhood was not conducive to this endeavor, and the father waived the tradition as in his view it wasn't a good idea. His teen age son however, insisted that this was a tradition that had to be carried out. Despite his families directives, this young man began his run around the block. After going only a very short distance he realized that his father was correct and he turned back. By the time he got home (only a few minutes from when he had left), his feet had turned black and he needed medical attention. He had severe frostbite, and almost lost his toes from this experience.

As I see these young men (it appears to be a male phenomenon), I struggle to understand the thought process behind this act. My guess is that this somehow creates a sense of "coolness" for them, or makes them a topic of conversation (or a blog). Perhaps it is a way for them to call attention to themselves. I would propose that if asked, they would be able to justify this behavior and dismiss my question as stupid or irrelevant. I hope that over the next week, another opportunity will arise for me to satisfy my curiosity about this trend (if it is a trend). In the meantime, I will continue to observe and ponder the significance of this behavior and perhaps arrive at at a reasonable conclusion based on my own theories.

A Hallmark Moment

As with most American Holidays, Valentines Day has its roots in a significant event, and had meaning based on this event. Over the course of time, although the meaning remains, the way that we observe this event has evolved into a marketer's dream. Specifically, how can marketers use this event to convince consumers to purchase 18 million red roses, 36 million boxes of chocolate, and countless other gifts. Whatever the methods have been, the success of this endeavor has resulted in sales of almost $14B, second only to Christmas in this respect.

The origin of Valentines day began in 270 AD. Claudius, emperor of Rome was convinced that married men made poor soldiers, resulting in a ban of all marriages in his empire. Valentine defied this order and was secretly marrying couples in violation of the decry. Claudius subsequently imprisoned Valentine, had him stoned and eventually beheaded. During the time of his imprisonment Valentine fell in love with his jailer's daughter, and prior to his death, he signed a farewell message to her "From your valentine." This phrase has been used on this day (February 14th) ever since.

The handwritten note gave way to mass produced greeting cards to show one's love for their significant other. The cards were eventually replaced by small gifts, and in the 1980's the diamond industry began to promote Valentine's day as an occasion for giving jewelry. From a handwritten note from an imprisoned man, came the second largest gift giving occasion in this country.

This development resulted from a well executed marketing program that has taken place over the past 1750 years. Appealing to the female audience, and their sense of emotion, red roses and hearts have symbolized this occasion for many years. It is estimated that 85% of all valentines are purchased by women. Whereas women view this as a special day with significance beyond another holiday, men tend to feel obligated to conform to the notion that a special gift must be purchased to commemorate this day. Evidence of this can be seen on February 13th, as men scramble to the malls and florists to justify their love.

Through commercialization, the expression of love has been associated with the purchase of a gift that represents that love. Supply and demand dictates the cost of the appropriate gifts (flowers etc), as now a premium can be charged for these items. The images of this day now translate into an expected behavior as consumers, and ultimately into high profits for retailers.

Perhaps this holiday creates an injustice to women by limiting their spouses ability to show their love at other times of the years. By dedicating one day a year to this ritual, perhaps men don't see the value of expressing this love at other times. In fact, sending roses on September 18th may mean more that sending them on a day when it is expected. But at the risk of being wrong, I must cut this short, as I have only 3 hours left before the mall closes. Happy Valentines Day!!

I love you Sandy!!

Mind your Manners - Please!!

A recent article published in Washington DC highlights a unique problem facing the Chinese government as it prepares to welcome the world in the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing. In a society where swallowing mucus is considered dangerous (thought to be poisonous), spitting in public is commonplace and accepted as a matter of fact. Western civilizations might not view this in the same light. This is only one example of the concern that government officials feel may leave a poor impression of Chinese people for the 600,000 visitors to Beijing.

This concern is so prevalent that it has prompted a book to be written entitled "Doing instead of Knowing" by Zhou Shiji. According to Shiji "if we don't change our habits before 2008 the world will look down on China". The book "teaches people how to establish good habits" he said. "Many Chinese know that their habits are bad, but they don't change because everyone else is doing the same things."

In addition to preaching the negative associations connected with spitting, his book addresses other issues such as cutting in lines, crossing streets against the lights, talking during movies, and cleaning up after their pets. This book goes along with Beijing 's efforts to train its citizens to act in a more civilized manner. The city has hired almost 5000 workers to assist in this effort. They are employed in roles such as "civilized bus riding" supervisors among other titles.

This effort illustrates the importance that image plays, not only on goods and services, but on entire societies. Much of the Olympic effort is concentrated on infrastructure, (roads,and buildings), and other services within the city, but this goes beyond all of these items into culture of the Chinese. Are these practices universally considered to be "wrong", or are they wrong merely relative to other societies?
From an American perspective, I would argue that dodging animal feces on the street, or carrying an umbrella to avoid spraying mucus would not leave me with a favorable impression of an otherwise brilliant city, but a Beijing inhabitant visiting the US may be equally appalled at our lackadaisical driving habits (use of cell phone, eating, drinking, etc).

Perhaps the examples in this book, and the efforts being made are harmless to the people of Beijing, and can in some small way be viewed as progress. Beyond these questionable habits, lies a deeper question: Who separates the good habits from the bad ones and decides to effect change. We will probably have to wait until the fall of next year to have this question answered.

For more information on this article please visit the following link:
http://www.coxwashington.com/reporters/content/reporters/stories/2006/04/30/BC_CHINA_MANNERS30_COX.html

Celebrity Branding

On a daily basis the American public is bombarded with "News" stories about the lives of "famous" people. Perhaps from a selfish perspective, I tend to dismiss these stories as umimportant with a nonchalant "who cares" type of reaction. After all, I will not be invited to Britney Spears wedding. nor will I be expected to send a baby gift for Angelina Jolie's new addition. But the fact that these stories appear on a daily basis indicates that someone does care about these stories. In a society in which supply and demand dictate the offerings in the market, if there was no demand for this information, there would be no stories worth publishing.

A closer look at this phenonenom reveals more about our culture than I would have thought. Like any consumer product, an image or brand is developed and nurtured that tells us what this product is and what it means. This is reinforced through various images and a barrage of messages regarding this product. Over the course of time these images are linked to the products and the associations created result in their purchase.

Consumerism generally refers to goods and services that have been created resulting from some unmet need in society. How does this concept become transferred to human beings? Obviously we are not creating the person, (although genetic engineering may solve this dilemma in the future). The answer appears to be how the image of this person is being formed and shaped. These images are not present at birth, but result from some God given talent or skill that this person may develop. (Children of celebrities are an exception to this, such as Paris Hilton). These skills generally have some entertainment value, (singers, actors, athletes), and once recognized, the branding begins. The skills are associated with the person and the image develops in the same way a new product is introduced. In this case the person is not the product, but their services or skills become the product.

An example of this in the sporting arena is Michael Jordan. "Branding" Michael Jordan created a desire to see him play basketball, in turn creating a demand for tickets to the Bull's games. This increased his value to the Bull's and subsequently increased the salary that the Bulls were willing to pay him. This also created more opportunites in merchandising sales as well as promotional appeal in the form of endorsements. This image of Michael Jordan has now been transferred to such companies as Nike, allowing them to capitalize on his branding. Consumers do not buy Michael Jordan, but they do buy goods and services derived from this image that has been created. Perhaps this can be expressed by one of the phrases coined by Nike in this process: "Be Like Mike". Wearing a jersey with his name, or attending a game in which he played may be the equivalent of purchasing a product that we "need". By associating ourselves with Michael Jordan, we are trained to believe that we have satisfied some unmet need to be like Mike. The commercialization of MJ has essentially programmed us to believe this to be true.

The branding process generally creates this concept of "need" for goods or service. Through the images received we are convinced that we "need" a certain product. We now "need" Air Jordan sneakers although in reality what we need is some basic protection for our feet. Through the power of marketing and advertising these needs have been extended into personalities. This concept is more allusive to me, as personally I do not want to be like Mike. In fact, for all of the publicity and information we recieve about Michael Jordan, I have no idea who he is. I know that he is a fantastic basketball player. I also know that I am not a good basketball player and I will never be a good basketball player. Therefore, no matter what the marketers are telling me, I cannot be like Mike.

With this in mind I have tried to understand our cultures continued facsination with celebrities. Is this an attempt to live precariously through someone else? Do we want to imitate these "stars" in the hope that we can have what they have (notriety or wealth)? Are these people heroes that should be worhiped and emulated, or are they merely ordinary people with extraordinary talents? I would argue that the branding of these people has elevated them to a status beyond their talents. I would also argue that because of this, their influence on consumers is disproportionate. Because someone has a great singing voice, should their opinions on abortion or the war in Iraq influence public policy? People should be influenced by those with those whom they are closest too. They should look to people whom they admire and respect because of who they are, and not what they can do. Our society needs to recognize celebrities for what they are, and not for the image that is being constructed by their personal marketers (publicists).

An unintended consequence = Costly mistake

A harmless (and tasteless) display to promote a TV show and upcoming movie turns the city of Boston upside down. In a scene similar to "The War of the Worlds", a city is held hostage by a marketing campaign gone awry. In what may be called "Marketing Gone Wild", this is the most recent example of the responsibility that Marketers have in attempting to promote their products.

The symbol pictured on the left is called a "Mooninite" and is a character from a TV show entitled "Aqua Teen Hunger Force". The show is an animated program on Turner Broadcasting System (TBS). In an effort to promote this show and an upcoming movie, this character was created and constructed on devices similar to lite brites that were placed in 10 major US cities including Boston.

A transit worker in Boston noticed this strange device underneath a interstate highway. After receiving several more "sightings", and without knowledge that these were merely a form of advertising, the Boston Police Department acted quickly and decisively. Within a short time portions of Interstate 93 were closed and subway service was suspended. The Boston Police were justifiably concerned over their citizens welfare, perhaps prompted by the memories of 9/11. These devices were being treated as bombs, and all precautions were being taken to diffuse the situation until they could ascertain what they were up against.

The realization that these devices were not bombs and merely an advertising ploy outraged the citizens of Boston and its officials. Two men were arrested for placing these devices in these locations, and it was discovered that they were employed by Interference Inc, an ad agency hired by TBS to promote its TV show.

TBS responded to this outrage with a public apology "We apologize to the citizens of Boston that a part a marketing campaign was mistaken for a public danger.", but the apology seemed to be too little too late. The city of Boston is seeking reparations from TBS to the tune of $750,000 and other cities are attempting to recover the costs of removing these devices.

The financial repercussions aside, a larger issue becomes how far can a company go to promote its product? Was this reaction triggered by unjustified paranoia, or was this an outcome that should have been foreseen? Did marketers cross the line in this instance, or was this merely a slight error in judgement? Although the answers to these questions are not obvious, I would argue that marketers could have and should have anticipated such a reaction. Post 9/11 Americans are justifiably paranoid about suspicious objects and are more aware of possible terrorists threats. Marketers live in this same environment, and should be aware of this heightened awareness. Even if they do not perceive this security anxiety themselves, an examination of our society would reveal this tension that exists today. We daily read or see an event that illustrates the changing world we live in, and marketers need to be aware of and respond to this new world.

FedEx Cup

The Professional Golfer's Association (PGA), in an effort to crown a Champion golfer each year, has partnered with Federal Express to award the FedEx Cup at the end of each season. The PGA was one of the few remaining organized sports that did not have a clearly defined way to determine the "Best" of their sport. (College football may be the last remaining holdout). Previous number ones were determined by rankings using various statistics for the year. The FedEx Cup is modeled after Nascar's Nextel Cup, in which players earn points each week depending on their finish in a given tournament. At the end of the season the top 144 point earners compete in four tournaments with points awarded for their respective finishes. At the end of these four tournaments, the player with the most points will be awarded the FedEx Cup, along with a check for $10M. The FedEx Cup represents the World's Greatest Golfer for that particular year. The payout is the largest single bonus awarded in all of sports ( and nearly double what Jack Nicklaus earned in his entire career).

The PGA is hoping to build upon its brand image and continue to revive an audience that continues to decline. In 2006 viewership for PGA tournaments was consistently lower than the previous years by over 10%. In fact the first three tournaments of the year, saw declines of over 50%, and the Master's viewership was down by 14%. Even the Tiger Woods effect has had less of an impact than in previous years.

Although this initiative seems to result from a dissatisfaction from Sponsors and viewers with the consistency of the fields from week to week, this prize may not be the solution. With tournaments running virtually every weekend from January - November, the top players need to choose the tournaments they participate in. When several of the top players are absent, ratings, and therefore advertising revenues are greatly diminished. Does Tiger Woods, Jim Furyk, Phil Michelson, or Vijay Singh need the money so badly that they will play every week?

Will this point system be the answer, or is there a more inherent issue driving the tour's popularity. There are those of the opinion that this will not save the PGA's ratings and that FedEx will not receive its bang for its buck. The top five players in the world know who they are, and a point system is not needed to separate them. In fact, if this system had been in place for 2006, the top ten ranked players in the world would have kept their rankings (although their prize money would have changed substantially).http://www.pgatour.com/fedexcup/weekly/

Perhaps the PGA should look at limiting the commercials and commentaries during the tournaments, and show what most fans want to see; great golf shots. Perhaps shortening the season may also help to create a more competitive environment on a weekly basis. (No other league has a season that lasts this long). An over saturated market does not create more demand for a product and financial incentives to the players may not be the answer that the PGA is looking for.

If the first two tournaments of the year are any indication, the PGA, FedEx and the other sponsors may be in for a long season. Their saving grace may be the 4 playoff tournaments, held at a time when baseball is over and football has not yet begun. Only then will we know if this new initiative has paid off. Until then, I for one, will enjoy the weekly battles and look forward to the presentation of the FedEx Cup.

A sign of the Times?

I recently realized how quickly the world is changing. The Catholic ideals that I was raised on seem to have been thrown out the window. In a world where sex is marketed to anyone and everyone and condoms are distributed in high school more children are born out of wedlock and to single parents than at any other time. A consequence of this is portrayed out on shows such as Jerry Springer, in which males appear in front of a national TV audience to discover if they will soon be called "Dad".
Although I thought this was in bad taste, I now realize that this is only the tip of the iceberg. In fact this phenomenon has now become a lucrative business for an entrepreneurial MBA student from Rice University.
Her company is called Indentigenes and primarily focuses on DNA testing for veryfying paternity discrepancies. What brought my attention to this was a huge black billboard off of interstate 90 in Chicago. The caption of the billboard in letters bigger than life: "Who's the father? 1-800-DNA-Type".

This question doesn't register in my mind as one that needs to be asked. Although I could forsee an occasional circumstance that could call warrant asking this question, I never realized the prevelance of this issue in our society. In fact, after three years of doing business, this company generated 6000 paternity cases (at $475 each).

This commentary is not meant to critisize Ms. Caskey, as she is not responsible for this decline in morality, but was astute enough to realize the potential buried within this growing trend. In fact she may be providing a valuable service to those who are wrongly taking responsibility for the actions of another. Her company has developed a less intrusive process of obtaining DNA based on saliva which has a 1 week turnaround time rather than 3 weeks. She has also taken her services to the global market, with a presense in Japan and plans on expanding into Brazil, Korea, the United Kingdom and Mexico.

My reaction to this billboard is based on my disgust with a portion of society that promotes this type of permisucous behavior resulting in the ambiguity of parenthood. I think it also is a commentary on our unwillingness to take responsibility for our actions. Our culture seems to shun responsibility, instead seeking to find blame for problems that we create. Perhaps it would make sense to educate young women more fully regarding the consequences of sexual activity (pregnancy being one such consequence). Promoting "safe sex" allows for these types of outcomes and perpetuates these behaviors.

Some might argue that this is some sort of evolution in our culture, and that Identigenes is a response to these changes in consumer demands. I would contend that although this comany is providing a inherenetly valuable service, the factors that created this demand do nothing to help advance our society, but contribute instead to its moral decay. Simultaneaously to this, America allows for entrepeneurs to capitalize on this opportunity and create a lucrative business.

What's in a name?

What does Jitterbug mean to you? To me it denotes a nostalgic dance step. I picture young women in long skirts and men with slicked back hair. A new company http://jitterbug.com/, is hoping for this response with a new cell phone service. As you might expect by the name, this phone is targeted toward senior citizens.
What makes this service appeal to seniors? Primarily it is the phone's simplicity: The keypad is very clear with large numbers and two buttons: Yes/No. The system prompts the user with questions that require a yes no response. There are no symbols, no menus, and no keyboard. Programming the phone with such items as speed dial numbers is handled by the company. To add someone to your call list, a toll free number is provided and the company will add these entries. The phones are preloaded with the number of minutes purchased, and the remaining minutes are displayed after each call. No worrying about overages, or additional charges.
It would appear that there is finally a cell phone company that understands its customers. Unlike other providors that compare themselves on the basis of having the fewest dropped calls, this company may be on to something. (Imagine a doctor promoting himself as having the fewest number of lost patients.) Cell phone companies admit that their service is bad, but it is not as bad as their competitors. Jitterbug seems to understand this and is trying to establish a niche for its service. For senior citizens, there is no need to go back to school or spend hours reading a cryptic users manual.
I have experienced this phenomenon first hand as my father -in-law recently purchased one of these phones and is very pleased with the process and the service. With his technical skills somewhat less that that of a younger generation, he has been able to use this phone with ease and does not have to say "Can you hear me now?"

Build it and they will come

Why do consumers try new goods and services even if they are satisfied with their current product or service. Case in point: I frequent an independent coffee shop near my house almost every day on my way to work. The service is fantastic, as I walk in the door and they are pouring my coffee for me. They have a frequent use card which tracks usage and allows for easy payment. (Can be loaded with money ahead of time) I can walk in, get my coffee with a smile without worrying about dealing with any cash or credit card. If this was Cheers, my name would be Norm. It couldn't be more simple!
A new coffee shop (Gloria Jeans) is opening across the street from this location. I believe that my normal consumer curiosity is drawing me into this new store when it opens. Yet when I give some thought to this desire, it does not seem logical. As described above, the coffee shop that I frequent is satisfying all of my needs and then some. There is nothing that this new store will be able to offer me that I am not already receiving. Although I am unsure of the price points, I am assuming that the coffee in Gloria Jeans will be priced very close to what I pay at Bella Vita. I love the taste of the coffee I drink and the service is second to none. Why then would I go to this new coffee shop? If my coffee drinking experience is being taken care of at Bella Vita, it seems counter intuitive that I would go anywhere else. Yet I seem to have this desire to check out the new place. I don't think that I am alone in this feeling, as new places always seem to do well initially. I would assume that even if I got a cup of coffee from Gloria Jeans, I would remain loyal to Bella Vita. With that in mind, why then go there at all? Although I love my current experience, am I looking for something more? Will I ever be satisfied?

In an effort to answer this question I wanted to determine if I was the only one who had this notion. I asked another regular customer of Bella Vita about his intentions with regard to Gloria Jeans. He indicated that he would probably "check it out", although he had had their coffee and was not impressed. When pressed further about why he would go there, he could not give me a clear reason, and was surprised that he couldn't give me a good answer. It would appear that curiosity regarding a new business is fairly normal consumer behavior, and Americans (if not all consumers), feel some innate desire to visit a new location just to "check it out".

To further explore this phenomenon, I spoke with the current owner of Bella Vita, Scott Johnson. His business opened approximately 2 1/2 years ago and the initial 2-3 months were very busy for him. His customer base seemed to level off after the "newness" lost its appeal, and he has seen an increasing level since this point (fluctuating somewhat due to seasonal attributes). When asked about his new competitor, Scott indicated that he welcomed the competition and felt that this may actually draw more customers to this area, and actually help to increase his business. Either way, he also planned on "checking it out", as would be expected from any competing brand.

As for the ultimate impact on his business, only time will tell. But consumer behavior would seem to indicate that Gloria Jeans will prompt an initial wave of curiosity seekers to "check out " their brand, but ultimately, this would level off and settle in at a level that is based on which business provides the best overall experience. Having a well established client base who have already demonstrated their loyalty, I would tend to think that Bella Vita will continue to thrive despite of this increased competition. based on my personal experience and my observations about this business.

The Grill Buying Guy

In his book On Paradise Drive, David Brooks portrayal of a slice of American Life comes alive in his description of "Patio Man". Perhaps because I am a guy and recently purchased a new gas grill, this narrative was hysterical. With his wife Cindy, the "Realtor Mom", and his two children Cody and Haly, Mr Brooks brings this family to life and describes their behavior with the comic twist of Robin Williams. Asking such pressing questions such as "Does this tool belt make me look fat?", to his slightly exagerated description of the 41 pound tub of laundry detergent, his insights seem to be right on and his writing style helps capture his thoughts perfectly.

With respect to the grill buying guy, I think he hits it on the head. There is something about a barbeque grill that is distintively male, and eminates testosterone. Evidence an ad copy from a radio station:

Copy: BBQ Galore SFX(backyard sounds, grilling steaks sizzle) Mike:(voice away from microphone) "Hey Phil, whatcha cooking over there?" Phil: (calmly)"Just grillin some steaks." Mike:(voice is closer now) "Didn't your wife ban you from the grill ever since the flaming roof incident?" Phil:(slight anger) "I was not banned from the grill, sir. I was merely told I should refrain from using lighter fluid and charcoal." Mike: "Well are you sure you should be really (pause) Whoa. Look at that gas grill! Where did you get that?" Phil:(smiling) "It was on sale at Barbecues Galore. It's an Epicure Outdoor Grill and look, it even has a hood mounted thermometer so I can get an accurate temperature on these steaks." Mike: "Is that a smoker tray?" Phil: "Yep and check out these." (sfx: CLICK) Mike: "You have lights built into your grill so you can..?" Phil and Mike together:"Grill at Night" Phil: "I know, pretty cool huh? Mike: " I have to get one of these. Now!" Phil: "Sure, it's called an Epicure at Barbecues Galore and they have all kinds of grills available in case they're all out of , you know, this particular model." Mike: "Boy, that would be a shame." Phil: "Yeah." Announcer: "Barbecues Galore, located in the Wilshire shopping center in Euless. 183 and Esters. Or visit BBQgalore-dot-com for more information.

Can't you almost smell the charcoal? Along with this is a sense of male bonding that comes alive in the discussion of this grill. The above ad reinforces these emotions showing the excitement that results from a barbeque grill. Purchasing such a grill would not only elevate your manliness, but also allow entrance into this exclusive club reserved only for the macho.

In our recent purchase of our gas grill, my wife had very little interest in the process. For her, this was a way to cook food, but to me, it was a way to show off my culinary expertise. As with the Grill Guy, we purchased a grill that is far bigger than we need, but it looks great on our patio and should the opportunity or need arise, that Bison will taste great with a little "Bone Sucking Sauce" ( a type of barbeque sauce for the females in the group). The only thing that is missing on this model is the cup holders for my Heineken, but beyond that I think that we made a great purchase. This has not evoked the same emotions from my wife, but then again, what does she know about grills. She becomes excited about other aspects of our house, and can imagine that I will see the day that I will be enjoying some awesome steaks and won't even notice that the entire kitchen has been remodeled. With the risk of stereotyping, I would guess that we are not the only husband and wife who fit so nicely into our roles, and the roles that marketers present to us.

Churches for the masses

After reading the chapter in "Branded Nation" by James Twitchell, I now have a slightly different outlook on the megachurches that have sprung up in the last decade. I have been to Willow Creek Commnity Church and I was impresed by its size and how well it was run. After reading this chapter it is obvious that the "business" of church takes precedent over the "purpose" of the church. The pastor is more than a minister, and more like a CEO. At $850,000 a year, he has a vested interest in increasing attendance, yet perhaps has lost sight of the reason for his "calling".

As treasurer of a small struggling church we too have been faced with various struggles, including financial ones, and we have tried to remain true to our congregation. Our goal is not to steal market share from other congregations, but to provide a place for all who wish to praise God for all he has done for us. Although we like to think that we are contemporary and progressive, the commercialization of religion does not interest our congregation.