Community

GfK AG formally withdrew from what originally was a friendly merger discussion with market-research company Taylor Nelson Sofres plc on Aug. 27, ending a months-long negotiation. TNS has been the target of a hostile takeover by advertising group WPP since early July. After WPP made its hostile bid, GfK tried to raise the funds to make a cash offer for TNS. “The board, after careful consideration, has concluded that the terms of the financing available did not enable a sufficiently compelling alternative cash offer to be made for TNS that was also economically in the best interests of the GfK shareholders,” GfK said in a statement released on its Web site.

WPP is offering $2.02 billion for TNS, which TNS says undervalues the company. As of press time, the company indicated that it will continue to reject the hostile bid from WPP. TNS generated $1.84 billion in revenue last year. WPP is the parent company to ad agencies including Ogilvy & Mather, JWT and Young & Rubicam. It also owns Kantar Group, which ranked No. 5 in Marketing News’ Honomichl Global 25 Report of the top market research firms by revenue. London-based TNS ranked third and GfK fourth. GfK is based in Nuremberg, Germany.

Posted by Allison at 9:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was struck by a story in the Aug. 27th Wall Street Journal headlined “WPP Closes In on Hostile Takeover of TNS.”

To give you some background (more of which will be in your Sept. 15 issue of Marketing News, so watch for it there) GfK AG had been trying to buy Taylor Nelson Sofres plc (TNS) when WPP in July launched an uninvited counteroffer of $2.02 billion. TNS is still saying publicly that it plans to fight the WPP onslaught.

The Journal story mentions that research is becoming more important for marketers and that big communications holding companies such as WPP are looking for more sources of income.

I was wondering just how much income it expects to add with TNS when I’ve often heard it can be a tricky proposition even in good economic times, let alone now, to get clients to allocate some of their project funds for research and measurement. A colleague, however, told me this is really more of a defensive move by WPP to keep TNS from falling into a competitor’s hands.

WPP already owns Kantar Group, which ranked No. 5 in Marketing News’ Honomichl Global 25 Report of the top market research firms. London-based TNS ranked third and GfK fourth.

What do you think of this move? A proactive way to grow WPP, a defensive move to keep a competitor from getting bigger, or maybe a bit of both? If WPP succeeds, who will be the next target and why? Will GfK be forced to look for another deal?

Posted by John at 4:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was struck by a story making the media rounds this past week about someone who fooled a noted magazine, Wine Spectator, into giving an award to a non-existent restaurant in Italy.

The reason wine critic Robin Goldstein says he put the entire concoction together was to show that awards programs have gotten out of hand, with magazines and others offering them simply to make money on entry fees rather than to truly find the best of anything.

I’ve been involved in magazine award programs in my career and hope that most magazines that give them take more effort than Wine Spectator seems to have with its program. But in doing them, I also was always struck by how hungry PR and marketing people in general are to get these awards for their companies and/or their clients.

Everyone likes to be liked, I suppose. And third-party validation and recognition is worth more, opinion and image-wise, than any paid media. But has the whole award thing gotten out of hand? Look ay Hollywood. I always look forward to the Oscars because I’m a serious movie buff. But now there’s also the Golden Globes and scores of others, do we really need all those too? And what good do they really do those movies?

How big a role do awards play in your brand-building efforts? How do you decide which are worth striving for and which are really just ways for their sponsors to rake in some cash?

Posted by John at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Like any top-flight magazine, Marketing News is constantly trying to improve itself for its readers, which is all of you. In fact, we on the editorial side of the magazine are having a brainstorming session this Friday to discuss what the magazine is today and what it will become in the next five years, whether in-print, online or in whatever other form you, our readers and AMA members, want.

I’d love to hear your thoughts. We’ve already done one formal readership study and plan another, but I’m open to your individual suggestions as well.

How do you read each issue of Marketing News you get? Cover to cover? Only skim the headlines, look only at case studies, cover stories?

What do you want to see in our pages? What can help you be better marketers? How do you see us evolving in the online world? Do you think print magazines will eventually go away or do you see a value of having a paper product you can take with you on an airplane or elsewhere?

What do you think are top marketing issues today and into next year that we should be covering? What marketing topics are you and colleagues talking about that we should be writing about as well?

I look forward to hearing from you here, or feel free to e-mail me directly at jfrank@ama.org.

Posted by John at 12:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Media reports have surfaced that some companies are not happy with the number of visitors being allowed to come to their pavilions on the Olympic green in Beijing. Marketing News special correspondent James Shih has a different view from the Green. Here’s his report

Beijing's Olympic Green is hardly green. It's a park all right, an amusement park - a veritable Disneyland of transnational corporations. Pavilions after pavilions stand in rows in the enormous outdoor space just north of the Bird's Nest, each equipped with interactive exhibits, visual marvels and abundant photo-ops.

At the Lenovo Showcase, you can have your picture taken with a real torch. At Omega, you learn the Official Olympic Timekeeper's secret to making watches. From homegrown enterprises like Bank of China to global giants like Coca-Cola, companies are hoping to further their brands in China and around the world by tapping into Beijing 2008's star power. Lights are everywhere, music is everywhere, and lights that play music are everywhere.

Reports have surfaced recently of sponsors griping about disappointing foot traffic because of the government's decision to only allow ticket holders of Olympics events into the area, and I expected the crowd to be sparse. Instead, I was greeted by hordes typical of any Chinese tourist site, even at 9:30 p.m.

The Lenovo Showcase was a 15-minute wait, and a representative estimated its daily visitors to be more than 4,000. Staff from other pavilions gave me similar figures. Despite speaking to reps from multiple exhibits, I heard no complaints about subpar attendance, and what I saw was consistent with those sentiments.

I'll admit that I was frustrated when I had to beg, bargain and sneak around to get onto the Green, but the measure does what it's supposed to do: keep the plaza clean, secure and fun. Thanks to the comfortable amount of people, I was able to enjoy what the Green had to offer, and I felt that my time, effort and money spent trying to get in were rewarded.

In fact, if the Green was open to the public, it risks falling victim to the fate of many other Chinese landmarks: overcrowded, vandalized and simply not pleasant. I doubt that's what the sponsors want their Chinese and international guests to experience, especially when customer experience is the one thing that these installations are meant to control.

The Kodak and Coca-Cola pavilions on the Olympic Green in Beijing.

Posted by John at 1:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It's that time of year again. Teachers and students alike are gearing up for the school year, getting their pencils and protractors organized for all of the reading and writing and 'rithmetic that lies ahead. And marketers don't have to miss out on all of the homework fun.

Check out the August 15th issue of Marketing News, in which marketing research vet Jack Honomichl is at it again, ranking the top 25 global marketing research companies, which command nearly 70% of the money spent worldwide on research services.

Also in this issue:

- Our columnists delve into lessons on clear and effective communication: Michael Krauss discusses Procter & Gamble CEO A.G. Lafley's ability to adapt and innovate for the next generation, and Don E. Schultz takes a look at the benefits of keeping everyone outside of the marketing department up to speed on your marketing strategy.

- Freelance writer Patricia Riedman explains how doing your homework is key to hiring the right marketing team.

- And I take a look at how real estate developers like the Chicago-based Scion Group have created new marketing vehicles with their luxury off-campus student residences.

Please peruse our August 15th issue and let us know what you think.

Posted by Elisabeth at 10:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It’s no doubt that the Web continues to play a critical role in our ability to connect with customers and prospects. And since these two communities are online and active, the challenge for us marketers is to find a way to be in THEIR space, and also create spaces that foster dialogue, interaction, and ultimately increase our company's profitability.

I asked social Web marketing guru Larry Weber to join me on today's program. Larry has spent the last three decades building global communications companies including Weber Shandwick Worldwide, and the W2 Group. He is also the founder of the the Massachusetts Innovation and Technology Exchange.

In addition to discussing the key differences between traditional and new media marketing, Larry's book identifies seven key steps in a process to build a digital community. They include creating a customer map, recruiting members, find the right online conduit strategy, moving from a monologue to a dialogue, measure the community's involvement, promote your community, and finally, always improve your community's benefits.

Specifically to the creation of a customer map, my show last week is a great resource. I interviewed Josh Bernoff of Forrester Research and co-author of the book Groundswell. On their Web site is a fabulous tool for identifying what your customers are doing online. Combining that information into a customer map is the key first step -- and often one marketes overlook.

Some of Larry's favorite Web sites he mentioned as resources for marketers include: ittoolbox.com and technorati.com. He also suggested we can learn from examples of great digital communities that already exist such as blogher.com .

What is most striking about the social Web is that though we as marketers may be driving, our customers are navigating. We must take their lead and really listen to what is valuable to them. Controlling the message is out. Transparency is in.

- David Kinard, PCM
Host, Marketing News Radio

Posted by David Kinard at 12:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I spent a lot of time this weekend, as I’d imagine a lot of you did, watching the Olympics. Between fencing matches and swimming heats, I was wondering what the marketing impact of the Games will be for China.

This is supposed to be China’s coming out party for the 21st century, after all, showcasing the new internationally business-focused China.

Watching the impressive opening ceremonies Friday night, though, I was struck by how much of the old China came through.

Old as in relying on people-power rather than technology – while there was technology, the volume of people involved in the ceremonies was mind-boggling.

Also old in the constant integration of the military in the ceremonies, right down to the flag raising which saw children transfer a flag to waiting Chinese soldiers. The NBC commentator I was listening to mentioned more than once that organizers wanted to convey the idea that the state was protecting its people, a message that might play for China’s internal audience but one that seems a bit off-putting for the rest of us.

Then there was the unfortunate murder in Beijing of the father-in-law of a U.S. volleyball coach. The killing might be written off by those of us in the West accustomed to such random acts, but it has to hurt a culture like China’s which places such emphasis on order and at least the outward appearance of tranquility.

There’s been widespread coverage about air quality issues in Beijing, right down to an Ad Age story about how the masks U.S. athletes were given to protect themselves from pollution may become hot fashion items. The air quality issue demonstrates that China hasn’t learned any lessons from the West’s past mistakes about how to industrialize without the associated environmental damage.

All in all, I’m not seeing gigantic pluses for China so far, what do you think? Am I missing something? Is the marketing gain in simply showing it can stage a major international event? Is that enough here?

Posted by John at 3:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Avenue A/Razorfish and Pluck Corp. announced a new agreement today to develop and market the ad industry's first technology that will inject social media and consumer-generated content into mainstream digital advertisements like banner ads.

The project, code-named AdLife, would mean a viewer would be able to view user-generated reviews without having to leave the display page. Shiv Singh, vice president and global social media lead for Avenue A/Razorfish stated in a release: "It's clear that consumers want a stronger voice in the conversation with the marketer. When developed, AdLife will enable consumer participation and social influence inside the billions of impressions received by traditional digital ad units."

Posted by Allison at 2:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Tasked with uncovering a big brand idea that can work across every channel, four people are locked in a conference room. Who should those four people be?

Brad Jakeman's answer might surprise many marketers. Jakeman, this morning's keynote speaker at Ad:Tech Chicago, is the former executive VP of marketing for Federated Department Stores and the mind behind Citibank's long-running (and Emmy Award-winning) "Live Richly" campaign. He says the four people should be: 1) A person with the talent of understanding the consumer and consumer insights, 2) A business head who knows how the business makes money, 3) An operations head who can be the "voice of reason" and answer concerns of capabilities or how an infrastructure would have to change to execute that brilliant idea, and 4) a marketing person.

Jakeman was insistent that any big brand idea must be owned by the company--not a company's agency. He says that if it is owned by the agency it won't get enough traction to survive, or be able to be fully absorbed by the company, which should live the message through all its communications and points of interaction with consumers.

It's a mainstreamed way of developing your marketing. Do you think this is all a company needs to get a new, feasable idea started?

Posted by Allison at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)