Coca-Cola, Healthy Lifestyles and CSR: Meaningful Initiatives versus Gimmicks

In theory Coca-Cola’s attempts to address the health issues associated with their products is admirable. But their latest venture – the Work It Out Calculator – is not just a marketing gimmick, but a socially dangerous one at that.

The online 'tool' launched in UK gives exercise suggestions to burn off the calories consumed in a Coca-Cola product. For starters, different people need to do different amounts of exercise depending on their weight, therefore rendering the ‘calculations’ useless. But more importantly, Coca-Cola has about as much credibility to teach us about health as Gü or McDonald’s. 

This is not criticism - what these brands provide instead is fun, indulgence and pleasure. There is no need to dilute their attractive taste-based propositions in this apologetic manner. I doubt Coca-Cola’s website is consumers’ first port of call to learn about calories and nutrition!

That said,  Coca-Cola's partnership with StreetGames (a charity that helps make sport accessible to young people) is bang in the money since it promotes a positive attitude to exercise. The difference between the two initiatives is subtle but important. The Work It Out Calculator encourages feelings of deficit and guilt. The mentality of ‘I’ve consumed 73 calories so I need to do 18min on a treadmill’ is most prevalent amongst people with eating disorders.  As a young people’s brand Coke has responsibility to stave off such unhealthy attitudes, not promote them. The StreetGames partnership, on the other hand, not only leverages Coca-Cola’s upbeat and democratic brand but also provides tangible benefits to users and community. 

CSR is to be celebrated, but only when it is meaningful and effective. Coca-Cola can do so much good; it’s a shame to see them waste resources on useless, half-baked initiatives.  

Enhancing Customer Experience Through Infographics: What 3 and Wonga Have in Common

Infographics are growing in popularity and stature, but their potential to enhance customer experience is still largely untapped.  Any brand that has to present its customers with complex quantitative data would benefit from doing so in a more user-friendly way.

Telecoms company 3 has just launched an app-based tool that allows its subscribers in Sweden to view their bill data and mobile usage in a funky interactive graphic funky interactive graphic form. In other words, it has turned a customer pain point of trawling through incomprehensible bills into a user-friendly, pleasurable experience. This is a great hallmark for a youthful and irreverent brand like 3, helping to differentiate its offer from that of other telecoms providers. 

Utilities and financial services brands could similarly make their customers’ lives easier by portraying bills and offers in a visual, straight forward and interactive manner. Wonga seems to have caught on to this with their simple loan calculator that takes complexity and confusion out of the application. 

The categories that could make best use of such visualization – telecoms, utilities and financial services – are not renowned for their customer-centricity. Which is precisely why they ought to take notice of this powerful tool. 

Democratization of ´Cool´ or How Tech & Media Are Taking Over From Luxury Brands

Yesterday's publication of the top 20 cool brands in the UK serves as a useful barometer for assessing the changing preferences of British consumers.

50% of brands in this list can be classified as media and technology; and with the exception of Bang&Olufsen all of these are broadly mass market. This signals a change from last year when the rankings were dominated by luxury brands that accounted for 50% (primarily in the fashion and car categories.

I disagree with Stephen Cheliotis of CoolBrands who views this difference as a product of austere economic climate. Brand attribute 'cool' is an indicator of aspiration rather than sales; it does not correlate to what the consumers actually use. It's not like all those Chanel and Dom Perignon consumers decided to take their custom to Twitter and BBC iPlayer instead.

Rather, the new top 20 show that what we aspire and look up to is changing. Conspicuous 'bling' is beginning to lose it's appeal; the most successful people and businesses show off their status by refusing to play by the rules. Think Mark Zuckerberg in a hoodie at conferences or Google's offices decked out with boats in which to hold meetings. Flashing luxury brands is increasingly seen as something that status-seekers (not status-holders) do.

Instead, we now look up to the exciting and buzzing tech world, which (rightly or wrongly) is perceived as innovative, irreverent, democratic, fun and informal. This is a long way off from the exclusive (and to some - arrogant) world of Rolex and Maserati.

Tech and media brands enable consumers become 'cool' by being in the know and using them discerningly. 'Cool' is becoming more difficult to buy on Sloane Street or Park Lane. 

In conclusion: technology has democratised what it means to be 'cool'. We should be a lot less surprised.

Gender Marketing: How to Sell to Women Pink

Ladies, unleash your inner bimbo! Finally an elegant hand has arrived that is thin enough to fit your delicate hands: BIC Cristal For Her Ball Pen.

This much-ridiculed launch does, however, contain a valuable lesson for marketers and innovators who do not seem to have learnt from past mistakes. Heard of La Femme? Launched by Chrysler in 1950s it was designed especially for women. Alas, the glorious creation of pastel pink exterior, rosebud patterned upholstery, purple carpeting and set of matching accessories (yes really!) was a flop.

The reason neither of these launches work is because the brands are trying to appeal to a type of woman that only exists in the imagination of a chauvinist male. A doomed target market if there ever was one.

That said, I admire Sheilas' Wheels. This pink-and-hairspray-happy insurance broker that targets female drivers uses the outdated female stereotype ironically and doesn’t take itself seriously (not unlike Lynx.) But more importantly, their entire proposition is built on a solid functional RTB – female drivers are statistically less likely to have an accident and therefore require lower premiums. 

Women buy into Sheilas' Wheels because it delivers them a tangible monetary benefit, NOT because they identify with the Barbie-like Sheilas. Yet there is no real functional benefit to the patronising pink pen or car.

Brands can be very successful by delivering only emotional (rather than functional) benefits to women. But to do this they need to understand us first.