Does this image make you want to buy ham?

Marketing is much more sophisticated than that.

But it’s nice to see the advertising worked – you noticed the advertised price of the fuel you bought.

I didn’t buy it. 2p/l cheaper up the road.

bumming the plumbing?
Says he

😆

Could you feed a pig bacon? Or Ham?

Harry_the_Spider – Member
I didn’t buy it. 2p/l cheaper up the road.
POSTED 5 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

Same difference – you noticed the advertised price. Twice.

😀

So, an advert for cheap meat failed to turn me gay and made me buy fuel from somewhere else? I’m really not clever enough to understand this.

All I was doing was pointing out that you noticed their simple advertising message. It really is that simple.

Can I at least make a pork roll comment or is that objectifying the male model?

I think this advert is sexist anyway. If it was a woman bearing her baps you’d all be mortified and refuse to buy any type of ham ever again anyway. I’m disgusted and having spent considerable time studying the advert I’m still not sure what brand of ham it is

All I was doing was pointing out that you noticed their simple advertising message. It really is that simple.

Fair enough. But not only did it not want to make me buy the advertised product it prompted me to go and spend £80 somewhere else.

Whatever. Richmond’s sausages are crap so I wouldn’t be tempted to buy the ham.

I think this advert is sexist anyway. If it was a woman bearing her baps you’d all be mortified and refuse to buy any type of ham ever again anyway.

What? Us? Noooo……………

Agreed Harry – but no advertiser expects their advertising and/or marketing to be 100% successful, but someone’s advertising was effective this time – they got £80 of your money…

mastiles_fanylion – Member

Precisely – well put leffeboy and Graham. The clever thing about this special ‘language’ is that the common people, although unable to read or write it, can understand when they are being spoken to.

Laughable – so we don’t even realize we are understanding this?

what utter bobbins. its the emperors new clothes. This advert does not make me or loads of other people associate any values with the product. It has got the name noticed but that is all.

It really is that simple – to a significant section of society this sort of thing is completely null. However I know those who tie up their lives in marketing are so gullible they simply refuse to accept that to some of us we know the emperor is naked

The techniques marketing people use are clearly much too sophisticated for you to understand yes. And even if they don’t work on you (as you claim), they do work on a large enough proportion of the buying public otherwise no-one would bother would they?

What brand of Gin do you prefer to drink TJ?
Is it the one in the green bottle with a white label? Do you also like the one in the pale blue bottle?
What does a circle divided into blue and white quadrants say to you?

mastiles_fanylion – Member

The techniques marketing people use are clearly much too sophisticated for you to understand yes. And even if they don’t work on you (as you claim), they do work on a large enough proportion of the buying public otherwise no-one would bother would they?

Really – the emporer is naked MF. I suggest you reread the parable. Its utter bobbins. The reason I know it has no effect on me is that I can see straight thru it.

Bikepawl – I recognise the labels, I do not associate those labels with anything but the product. I buy for what the product is not for what it is marketed as

Harry the spider: In the 24 or so hours since I saw it I have not been tempted to grow a beard, buy a hat, eat cheap meat or have a bum. It has therefore failed.

I don’t think they expected to have a dramatic effect on all ham sales etc – and on that basis your thread title is flawed. All the supplier wants to do is ensure that when you are standing at the meat counter faced with choices between various different brands of remarkably similar ham, you might just pick his. That might be because you remember the name but don’t know why, it might be because you liked his quirky add that now reminds you of the finer points of STW or it might be because he has planted a message in your head that his ham is more natural than the others. So long as some people buy his ham rather than making a random selection his advert has worked. You can tell yourself that marketing doesn’t work, but at a population wide level it does.

I buy for what the product is not for what it is marketed as

Advertising has many purposes TJ, not just marketing, (lifestyle) but sales as well, if you “regonise” hat gin is best from a green bottle, hen it’s just the same as far as the company is concerened.

More sales

GrahamS – Member

TJs views on marketing are well known. in short, brands and marketing messages have no effect at all and are a secret language only understood by other designers and marketing folk. 🙄

Well TJ’s views on marketing are not well known to me. And why do you provide a link to this page when there isn’t a single post by TJ ?

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/clever-logo-well-i-thought-so-anyway

Or did you expect me to read all 49 pages in the thread ?

Besides, why are you holding him accountable for what he said 10 months ago ? You said : “Only TJ can directly contradict himself in two adjacent sentences, yet still be right.” You didn’t say anything about “Only TJ can directly contradict himself over a period of 10 months, yet still be right”

At least JY made a halfarsed attempt to prove that TJ had directly contradicted himself in two adjacent sentences, you on the other hand, despite being the original accuser, only managed to dig up something which which you allegedly claim TJ said almost a year ago. I say allegedly because the link you provide draws a complete blank.

I think a much more honest statement would be : Only TJ can attract the sort of poor quality and baseless attack on his character which you launched GrahamS.

And with that I rest my client’s case 🙂

TJ – I have already said that I accept that you claim to be impervious to advertising and marketing techniques. My point is that it does work on enough people to have an effect overall on sales of products and services.

And I do think you have said ’emporer’s new clothes’ enough times now – regurgitating the same line continually makes it no more correct. Or is this the marketing technique you employ to make your argument believable?

Back to the original advert, did nature intend us to have a little hat on?

Well yes buy you can always have it removed and not just for religious beliefs but for hygiene reasons.

However I know those who tie up their lives in marketing are so gullible they simply refuse to accept that to some of us we know the emperor is naked

excellent choice of language
I would tend to agree but no one can claim to be free of marketting I have never eaten from Mcdonalds but I can name a hell of a lot of their range due to adverts/popular culture etc. I could not tell you what Burger King sell so it does work on some level. Lots of it is Bobbins TJ and you may be the exemplar rather than a typical consumer

Well TJ’s views on marketing are not well known to me. And why do you provide a link to this page when there isn’t a single post by TJ ?
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/clever-logo-well-i-thought-so-anyway
Or did you expect me to read all 49 pages in the thread ?

Well if you dont now your clients voews you may not be the best advocate and it would indeed be helpful to have all the facts at your disposal before mounting a defence – really you should read it to understand your clients view on the subject and my clients comments

Besides, why are you holding him accountable for what he said 10 months ago ?

I am preety sure we can all agree that it is unlikely he has changed his view since on this issue

You said : “Only TJ can directly contradict himself in two adjacent sentences, yet still be right.” You didn’t say anything about”Only TJ can directly contradict himself over a period of 10 months, yet still be right”

Thats right he did not say that

At least JY made a halfarsed attempt to prove that TJ had directly contradicted himself in two adjacent sentences, you on the other hand, despite being the original accuser, only managed to dig up something which which you allegedly claim TJ said almost a year ago. I say allegedly because the link you provide draws a complete blank.

Half arsed…YIPEEE , you mean it was one of my better attempts 8)
I think the point is TJ say he is not affected but he now knows the advert. If he knows it he is affected. Unless he can unknow of course and forget at will the things he has seen and opinions he has formed.

I think a much more honest statement would be : Only TJ can attract the sort of poor quality and baseless attack on his character which you launched GrahamS.

Would you how interesting. It would appear that GrahamS can also attract poor quality and baseless attack on his character
😉
And with that I rest my client’s case

TJ is half right – only half right because it isn’t clear that being able to see through the ad means that it has no effect. This article
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201008/what-does-advertising-do

basically says that the objective of some advertising isn’t to tell you about the product but rather to make an association in your brain with other positive images. Then, when you are making rush decisions (like when shopping), the positive feelings will influence your decision whether or not you like it. Yes, if you are purchasing everything logically, then you won’t let that override you. But when you are running around throwing things in a trolley you are less likely to be quite as logical. The article linked to refers to a study that shows that but it is an internet article so who knows.

However, I can guarantee that my family often come home with stuff that makes no logical sense but is dripping with marketing e.g. gloves with a million labels showing all of the things that some of the gloves in the range can do (but not necessarily these particular gloves). Of course even though they are clear that these gloves only have one or two of those features it’s deceptive and it works 🙁

IME experience very few of the people who criticise marketing have ever studied it, or been a practitioner…
They think that because they’re consumers of marketing that they understand how it’s produced. Given that most people in the industry don’t really understand it, there’s not much chance of the average consumer doing so…

Marketing as an industry might be cynical/not really care about anything except selling stuff but it’s not half as sophisticated or in possession of ‘secret, nefarious techniques’ as detractors think it is…

Marketing is simply about finding a way to sell stuff. It mainly does this by appealing to our motivations.
The fact is that many of us are not as aware of our motivations and personal psychological makeup as we like to think we are. Equally we don’t like to really admit to being vain, selfish, in need of status etc etc.

So we claim ‘marketing is in the wrong’ to protect ourselves from our own needs, the ones we’d rather not admit to.

People also confuse product development with branding, with marketing communications, with sales etc.

At the end of the day we live in a capitalist society and we want to buy stuff. Therefore marketing exists… how do you think you’d get your weekly supermarket shop done if everything in the store was in the same size brown box, unlabelled, unpriced??

IME when marketing’s done well ie: a good product, sold honestly, which works and has good customer service, people enjoy the whole experience and are very positive about it. Think about CRC back in 2005/6 and what we used to say about it on here…
When it’s done badly or dishonestly, however, it fails. So saying ALL marketing is bad because some is manipulative or dishonest is a bit like saying cycling’s cr&p because my Halfords BSO fell apart ragging it down Snowdon…

brooess – I don’t think anyone is saying it is bad or wrong. The discussion is more about whether it really works. I’m clear – it works, but I’m also clear that often it is deceptive.

I went to Morrison’s and bought 24 packs of Richmond’s ham on the back of this thread.

It’s bloody lovely.

Brooness

My point is that the attempts to associate certain qualities with certain brands by the use of imagery and such things as fonts the effectiveness of this is grossly overstated. Many of us see straight thru it.

Its nothing like as effective or sophisticated as its adherents believe. all those in the industry have an incentive to believe in its effectiveness and find it very hard to accept that for many of us its completely irrelevant to our lives. indeed often counter productive.

The original advert. I do not associate that brand with wholesome outdoor imagery – I associate it with a rubbish marketing concept that is laughable in its stupidity.

It does work.
1. Sometimes it works because it’s honest
2. Sometimes it works because it understands our needs better than we do ourselves. Which I don’t think is deceptive but we perceive it as being so because we don’t understand ourselves fully
3. Sometimes it works because, frankly, we’re happy to be taken in by dishonesty… think about how McD’s routinely avoids the facts that their food is nutritiously absent and it bad for you…

The mistake a lot of people make when judging marketing is that because a lot of it is 3, they think none of it is 1…

Even tho I defend marketing from criticism, after 15 years in the industry I’m trying to get out because as an industry it tolerates levels of dishonesty and mediocrity I don’t want to be involved with any more…

Brooness
My point is that the attempts to associate certain qualities with certain brands by the use of imagery and such things as fonts the effectiveness of this is grossly overstated. Many of us see straight thru it.
Its nothing like as effective or sophisticated as its adherents believe. all those in the industry have an incentive to believe in its effectiveness and find it very hard to accept that for many of us its completely irrelevant to our lives. indeed often counter productive.
The original advert. I do not associate that brand with wholesome outdoor imagery – I associate it with a rubbish marketing concept that is laughable in its stupidity.
POSTED 4 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

You say all this but isn’t it clear to you that it is the most simple task for any given business to see if their marketing/advertising campaign has worked. And given that is unarguably a fact, can’t we also assume these campaigns generally result in better sales figures?

Would you how interesting. It would appear that GrahamS can also attract poor quality and baseless attack on his character

Not from me. I have no interest in attacking GrahamS’s character. I have merely pointed out that his attack on TJ is of poor quality, not helped by the fact that the links he provides draw a complete blank. I’m sure GrahamS is a top geezer – just not very good at the fashionable pastime of slagging off TJ. But perhaps you think that constitutes a stain on his character JY ?

You say all this but isn’t it clear to you that it is the most simple task for any given business to see if their marketing/advertising campaign has worked.

No – I would say it was complex and difficult to show – especially the points you make about associating certain attributes with the brand – yes brand recognition may be easy to measure but other attributes – very hard indeed – especially this laughable concept that fonts carry meaning that is inherent.

I would be interested if you can show me any rigorous data on this

We do tend to associate marketing and branding with “predatory” large corporations. This thread has already included references to McDonalds (though I actually had to remind myself if that was MacD or McD). However, I reckon that one of the most successful re-branding exercises of the past 50 years or so is that carried out by the Peoples Party of the UK – now of course known as The Green Party.

It’s such a simple brand, but one we can all recognise and understand without having to delve in to anything tedious like PPBs or manifestos. “Green” issues cover such a wide spectrum of worthy causes, it makes you feel all warm inside just aligning yourself with them, it’s international so, even if you were to emigrate, you might have a good chance of having another Green Party to vote for.

A quick visit to http://www.greenparty.org.uk/ will let you see how they implement the brand.

Sorry, I’m on holiday. (Centre Parcs – I fell for their advertising y’see)

I thought I explained the contradiction well enough ernie – TJ stated his belief (which I have heard before, hence my link to previous case notes) that all marketing is bunkum and doesn’t work. Then in his next statement said “it has caught your attention and you have published the name wider” which pretty much suggests it does work. Certainly everyone reading this thread is now aware of Richmond Ham and may even have noted that they want to portray it as natural.

Anyway it’s a funny old argument: TJ claims that no one but designers and ad execs understands the “secret language”. But I understand it and I’m just a normal joe. He also claims advertising has no effect on him because he sees through it, so presumably he understands the “code” too.

Anyway read the previous thread (start a page 4 ernie) to save yourselves going through it all with him again.

Me, I’m off for another unbranded beer chosen purely on its merits.

Have fun.

Sorry, I’m on holiday. (Centre Parcs – I fell for their advertising y’see)

I thought I explained the contradiction well enough ernie – TJ stated his belief (which I have heard before, hence my link to previous case notes) that all marketing is bunkum and doesn’t work. Then in his next statement said “it has caught your attention and you have published the name wider” which pretty much suggests it does work. Certainly everyone reading this thread is now aware of Richmond Ham and may even have noted that they want to portray it as natural.

Anyway it’s a funny old argument: TJ claims that no one but designers and ad execs understands the “secret language”. But I understand it and I’m just a normal joe. He also claims advertising has no effect on him because he sees through it, so presumably he understands the “code” too.

Anyway read the previous thread (start a page 4 ernie) to save yourselves going through it all with him again.

Me, I’m off for another unbranded beer chosen purely on its merits.

Have fun.

Graham – shame that actually none of that is what I have said. never mind.

Just seen the advert on between Star Trek, and definately no Klingons in the advert.

Its obviously male demasculinisation,by females, useing the male figure to sell product, meat being a manly eating expereience, from the time we where hunter gatherers, now it appears we are just a sex symbol to sell cheap meat slices,it belittles and humiliates the male and i for one shall be reporting the offending advert to to the ASA.

In addition to the TV ad, the campaign will feature a sampling campaign running across Asda and Tesco stores throughout the summer.

The sampling will include farmer-themed sampling bars and stands, which will offer shoppers the chance to try the cooked ham

Something top look forward to then,

now it appears we are just a sex symbol to sell cheap meat slices,it belittles and humiliates the male and i for one shall be reporting the offending advert to to the ASA.

I bloody dream of being seen as just a piece of (prime, baby 8) ) meat. All this polymath stuff’s getting me down lately

I thought I explained the contradiction well enough ernie

Ah well, as long as you’re satisfied. I couldn’t really see a contradiction in the two adjacent sentences. Still never mind – enjoy your holiday and fret not. BTW have I mentioned that I think you’re a top geezer ?

Blimey you lot take marketing seriously!

It’s ham that we take seriously on here emma, advertising/marketing is like water off a duck’s back

natural ham..!?

eurghh… how primitive.. lab grown meat is where it’s at