One of my colleagues and I were speaking to a class of new hires. He said, “Marketers will always have to communicate to their customers, but that does not mean it will always be in print”. I then thought back to a conversation I had with a senior marketer at a large credit card company. She mentioned, “It’s not that we don’t believe in print, most of us have come from deep print roots, we are just unsure how long it is going to be around. And today, it is hard to justify updating, upgrading the print channel technology when the corporation dictates the shift to web 2.0 online tactics.”
The Relevancy Report determined that 75% of people continue to receive promotions for products already purchased. And that 64% are considering or have left the brand due to the level of irrelevant messaging in both email and direct mail.
Since the Great Recession of 2008 which to date is the longest recession on the books had taken its toll on the consumer. (All recessions except for this last one has corrected itself within 16 months.) The consumer is not only tired of irrelevant messaging – but there is also a genuine mistrust for Wall Street, banking, and anyone that could be considered a crook. The consumer is shifting from a self indulgent , high end, luxury buyer to a value driven, environmentally conscious, re-use, recycle, reduce my carbon foot print buyer.
Case and Point: Gourmet Magazine. The once highly touted and deeply loved foodie magazine – known for its mouth watering – you could almost make this at home- cover and recipes – makes history. This highly designed, finely photographed, accompanied with above average writing – stunned the industry by closing the book on this legendary magazine. The New York Times just a few months before the surprise announcement, had an interview Paul Jowdy, publisher of the in-house rival Bon Appétit, said that such a closing was unlikely. “They would never do that,” Mr. Jowdy said in February 2009. “They’re both very important magazines in the culinary world, and they’re very different magazines, and they’re both very healthy. According to the NYT, Conde Naste’s magazines had lost more than 8,000 ad pages.
Can the demise be partially attributed to the changing consumer mindsets? Did Gourmet miss the shift away from steaks and back to Tupperware? (Tupperware reported a 28% increase in profits in 2/2010) But as Seth
hints in his blog, only a sliver of the production budget at Gourmet went to develop rich, relevant content; leaving the majority of the spend for fluff rather than relevance to the now, value centric reader.
Marketers will always have to communicate to their customers. The challenge is the relevancy of the message, the timing of the message, and the delivery channel. It’s not about the medium; it’s about the relevancy of the message to the receiving customer.
Data drives relevance, relevance drives loyalty, and loyalty drives revenue.
Well said and good points. But a quibble. I think the medium still is the message in the sense that different mediums create different behaviors. What I’m trying to point to is that shared TV in the 1960′s created the behavior of the family sitting around watching. It was TV as hearth. The content was not as important as the reality of how that content was delivered.
I think the insight is useful to clarify the differing values of Print and TV and the Internet. Consider the behavior created by the medium of Print. In a book of words it is singular. But in a book of photos it is an experience that can be shared much more easily than anything on a screen. Some have said that the really disruptive innovation of the iPad is the ability to again share TV. I think they’re right.
There’s lots more to say. But for me, it’s a very good start to a path to figure out how everything fits together.
As always, good point. I think the medium creates the experience, and the message drives the customer to action.
Good to hear from you.
Michael J,
Insightful. Your comments are — as always — much appreciated. Perhaps the fact that the message has morphed into static, irrelevant noise in many channels (mediums) points to the fact that the contrast of sending a relevant message will resonate enormously in driving customer engagement. From irrelevant to relevant. From static to dynamic. From poor to great. From irritating to engaging. From cookie-cutter to customized. From stranger to friend. Huge deltas that get noticed.
Sandra
Thank you for a great point… “The Relevancy Report determined that 75% of people continue to receive promotions for products already purchased. And that 64% are considering or have left the brand due to the level of irrelevant messaging in both email and direct mail.”
I have this conversation all of the time. You know the exercise.. show me everything you’ve sent to a customer in the last year. Now tell me what products of yours they already have.
It’s astounding how little data management is going on in major brands.
I look at my own mail box and see the same thing.
Print is not irrelevant, and it can be a green and cost effective marketing tool as long as you don’t send irrelevant pieces to your customers! But… same caveat on email. I have half a dozen emails in jsut the last week asking me to participate in events that I have already signed up for, to renew subscriptions I have already renewed, and to take advantage of sale specials that I have already shopped. We have to do a better job across all of the marketing channels.
Cheers!