Avatar as an examination of marketing

According to BoxOfficeMojo, Avatar has grossed more than $1.4 BILLION, and counting! There is no definitive answer at the time of writing this, but production costs for the movie appear to be close to $300 million, and marketing costs close to $200 million.

So, here's a question (for which there is probably no answer):

How much would the movie gross if they had spent less on marketing? Or more on marketing? How much would the movie gross if they had spent less on production (presumably weakening the quality of the product)?

This is a very common question - one that we grapple with all the time. Will more marketing lead to enough sales to earn our money back? Is the product good enough on its own to be successful without extensive marketing?

And here's another thing business owners and marketers need to keep in mind: It's possible that the movie would have grossed, say, $1.25 billion with no marketing, putting them $50 million ahead of where they are now (saving $200 million on marketing but earning $150 million less). Would that mean the marketing was a waste? It's tempting to say yes, but think of all the awareness for the movie and for James Cameron and for Fox that was generated!


All marketing has benefits beyond its direct impact on sales.


Remember that as you consider investing in marketing.


Your turn: What's your guess about the box office sales with more (or less) spending on the product or on the marketing?

Ford in a price war against itself!

OK, this is a new low for advertising.

I see way too many examples of internal inefficiencies getting in the way of effective marketing, but this one takes the cake.

We all know that car dealerships, even within the same manufacturer, work independently. We understand that this inefficiency exists, but that doesn't make it excusable.

Today on the radio I heard a spot for the World Ford dealership in Miami. This is what they said:

"Bring us a lower quote from any other Ford and we'll beat it!"

From any other Ford?!?! They're in a price war... against themselves! Now, I know WHY they're doing this (because each dealer is independent and trying to hit their numbers), but it's an internal, structural inefficiency that has created a monster.

Imagine for a moment...

"Bring us a lower quote for a BigMac and we'll sell you this BigMac for less."

It just doesn't make any sense. As a consumer, I shouldn't be subjected to your internal problems. A Ford is a Ford. If I go to one Ford store, a Taurus should be the same price as it is at another Ford store.

Don't let your internal inadequacies spill into the consumer's experience.

If it weren't for their spinach dip, I'd never go to Kelsey's again

I ripped Kelsey's in an earlier post for their lack of creativity (by using the Cheer's theme song) and it would seem their marketing laziness continues.

I heard a radio spot today which described some of life's great (pleasant) surprises, including rekindling an old romance, or... wait for it... discovering that Kelsey's has all-you-can-eat wings for $15.99.

And they were serious!

Are you kidding me?

They're trying to tell me that I should be just as excited about $15.99 wings as I should be about rekindling an old romance! Never in a thousand years Kelsey's!

If they were being sarcastic, I might have bought it. Instead, they just come off as ridiculous. Is that really the best they can come up with? I'll never equate those things, and worse yet, $15.99 isn't even that much of a deal! Give me an all-you-can-eat wings offer of $5.99 and maybe I'll be somewhat surprised, but still not as much as they claim I should be at $15.99.

When your ads are this ridiculous, you accomplish nothing but damage to your brand (see Bad Boy Furniture).

Have your say: What are the cheesiest ads of all time?

Another price promise unkept!

I wrote in a previous post (two below) about Pizza Hut's failure to deliver on their $6 pizza promise. Now we have another culprit committing the same brand offence - GM Goodwrench.

Their latest radio campaign attempts to establish (just as adamantly as Pizza Hut does) that they sell tires for $89.95. They go so far as to survey other retailers for their price ($106 average). But then the spot says "dealers will set individual prices"!!! No they won't. Not according to your ad they won't. The price will be $89.95. There's a mismatch between the advertised price and the actual price - a failure to deliver on the brand promise.

Shame on you GM Goodwrench! You should read my blog more often!

Don't waste your marketing dollars

Too often I see companies wasting money on advertising media that doesn't suit them. Brodie Limited is the latest victim.

Yesterday I was tackling the morning drive into Toronto and I heard an ad on the radio for these "Big Lasers" from Brodie Ltd. They even have a memorable redirect url - www.biglaser.ca. It didn't take me long to figure out that this is a company that makes and sells laser metal cutters, and that their cutters can make precise cuts over large areas. Now, it's a effective ad in that I got the message, but they wasted their money.

On the morning drive into Toronto, on the station to which I was listening, at any one moment in time you have EVERYONE who drives a car listening, regardless of what they do. Presumably, Brodie wants to target metal cutting purchasers or managers responsible for the precise cutting of large sheets of metal. What percentage of the morning Toronto commuters would fit that description? 0.002%? Yet the advertising sales rep for that station certainly charged the same rate he/she would charge any other company. Brodie paid to reach 100% of drivers, when it only wanted to reach 0.002%. That's 99.998% waste.

Now it's entirely possible that Brodie has exhausted every other possible marketing tactic and decided to simply build brand awareness through mass media marketing. Nothing wrong with that, but I doubt that's the case. And for such a unique product, I'm not even sure the benefit of brand awareness is worth the investment. I must also admit that it's possible they got the air time for free (maybe a Superbowl wager gone bad), but I doubt that too. The point is, they likely spent money reaching out to a lot of people that will never have anything to do with laser cutters.

And they're not the only victims - I see it all the time.

Most often small companies like Brodie come across a marketing idea that seems like a good idea, but they're not getting good advice about that idea. Maybe a colleague or even a relative mentioned it in passing, and they thought they should be proactive marketers, so they look into it. An advertising sales rep would talk about the merits of brand awareness and would not be motivated to turn them away, so off they go!

To me, though, that money is much better spent on tactics where (closer to) 100% of the audience is a potential customer. Trade shows, trade publication print ads, web site advertising on industry sites, Search Engine Marketing (SEM), and so on and so on.

The key is to maximize the percentage of the audience that would be a potential customer. Mass media isn't always the best approach.