the world according to schmogel.

A lot has been written about the new Yahoo! campaign. The punch line to the conversations I have had and the posts I have read: Yahoo! missed the mark. This isn’t surprising in hindsight. Especially if you strip it down to the basics.

We are in the age of people, not consumers. Unique people. Diverse people. People who want things they want, personalize what they want, share things they want, relate to things that they like. The same people who beg to be spoken to, not at. Which is why I don’t understand how the people at Yahoo!, (you know the ones with all that data on consumer trends, a buzz index, search trends- the ones who should have predicted this very outcome) let this campaign see the light of day. They broke a simple rule: Don’t Assume. Or that other rule- the one about not being everything to everyone.

Under no circumstance should a brand message overtly tell a target/consumer/user (whatever marketing word you use in your brief) you are talking to them and try to prove it with a barrage of photo-shopped, beautiful, mulit-race, multi-aged, happy-as-a-pig-in-shit, dancing people and that they should see themselves in there. Don’t do it. Don’t assume they will find someone to connect with or want to connect with. Don’t assume they have aspirations to be any of those people in any of those scenarios. Apparently, that did not come out in the focus groups for Yahoo.

But, what if you have a product or a service that you do want people to imagine themselves using? One that solves a specific, personalized need. One that has a large target base not defined by one demographic profile. ‘You’ should not be feared. ‘You’ is a word that can be used correctly. It can be used in a way a consumer can relate to. An unlikely good example coming from this vacuum-hating, digital girl: the Bissell TV spot.

Bissell launched an ad asking “is your vacuum a good match for you?” You. There’s that word again. But it is used differently. Instead of showing messy house, a frazzled mom, a busy young-single in a suit, and hoping I can connect with that moment, Bissell personified the vacuum to showcase the their product benefits and their competitors short-comings.

‘You’ don’t want a girlie one that won’t touch the pet hair. I don’t see myself in that moment, but I know I hate it when my vacuum doesn’t get everything.

‘You’ don’t want the big tough, heavy one that can’t maneuver easily. Bissell, you are right. Heavy vacuums are not for me. They highlight different features that are relatable, features that solve an immediate need. Bissell declares, “at Bissell, we design our vacuums with you in mind.” And they created a spot that makes me believe that. And, it’s a vacuum, people. A vacuum.

You might say, there is no comparison. Apples to oranges. You may have a case, but play along with me for a second. Read the following statements and guess who I am describing: Yahoo or Bissell:

1. I can solve a need

2. I can simplify something that is frustrating

3. I use consumer insights to design products and features

4. I spend a lot of money to develop new ways to solve new issues

5. A variety of people, in all shapes, sizes, counties and income levels use me. And use me often.

6. I am in a very competitive category

7. I need to speak directly to people, without alienating anyone

Give up? Both. All of those statements and more can describe both brands. So, I ask you. How did Yahoo miss the mark by such a huge margin, while a vacuum nailed it? Why did Yahoo shy away from focusing on solutions, simplifying benefits? or at the very least tell me why I should care. Even if I see myself in those ads, I still don’t know why Yahoo is the right place for me to go. Why didn’t Yahoo tell me or show me Yahoo? Please help me understand, because this one baffles me.

Watch both spots and tell me if you agree, disagree or could care less.

Well, I guess we can chalk it up to real time optimization. TGIF has now overcome two major consumer backlashes/frustrations with their current Free Burger, Friend Woody campaign.

Instead of hearing over and over on next year’s conference circuit about the hard lessons learned from a social campaign gone awry, we will instead praise TGIF for on-the-fly listening and reacting. Ultimately, salvaging the campaign. [prediction: this will be a trend we hear a lot about]

First, was the “first 500,000 fans” get a burger. The mistake did not come because fan 500,001 was pissed. Woody gave plenty of notice that it was the first 500,000. The backlash came because of two things:

1. It was promoted with media that could not be pulled down once the 500,000 was complete (read: tv and print)

2. Once fan 500,001 and beyond made it to the site, there was no indication that they were too late. TGIF collected their email, got the fan and then told the “too bad, so sad. better luck next time.” ‘Fans’ felt tricked. They held up their end of the bargain and Woody did not.

Solution: Open it up to 1MM people- immediately. And over-communicate as we get closer and closer to 1MM.

The current cluster fuck they are dealing with: online coupon redemption and security. TGIF used CouponsInc. to serve and track the coupon. From a brand side, it’s great. It gets security (can’t over print it), it gets tracking, and they don’t have to mail out 1MM coupons. But wait… consumers get mad when you force them to fill out a form for something free, they are for sure going to get pissed off when you make them download an applet. Which is what you have to do as a consumer.

When you run online couponing one can usually plan and predict a few things:

1. a percentage will give up and not print, not a huge loss

2. another chunk will call in and you will have to spend the extra $2 to mail them a coupon on secure paper

3. the final chunk will do it. YIppy! everyone is happy or at least not pissed off.

Enter facebook. Instead of complaining to your poor poor customer service operators, they bitch, moan and voice their frustration online for all to see. and they don’t stop at this one promotion – they start talks of trust issues, never eating there again… uh oh.

that is why I was not surprised when I received an email that was entitled: Your burger coupon is right inside. No, really.

The header: OUR COUPONS SHOULDN’T BE ROCKET SCIENCE. (I guess this is not going to be the awesome case study CouponsInc. was hoping for)

“I hear there are a few unhappy fans out there, and I’m not gonna stand for it! So I talked T.G.I. FRiDAY’S® into making their coupons easier to print. Now you don’t have to download anything. If you haven’t already printed your burger coupon… Print this! But show your coupon to your server BEFORE you order. That way they know Woody sent ya!

P.S. I couldn’t talk them into removing the serial code. So don’t bother forwarding this onto everyone you know, as this coupon can only be used once.”

WIN! In the new age of real time customer satisfaction, it is essential for a brand to solve your issue as close to the “FRUSTRATION PEAK (TM)” as possible. If you wait too long, it’s over. If you do it quickly enough you have a good chance that the frustrated throw you a bone and at least post something that says you tried to make it right.

Don’t worry TGIF, it is almost over- and you will get a good case study out of this. and I will see you talking about it on multiple panels next year.

But someone will probably be talking about how the coupon was only good for 4 days. Eh, you can’t win ‘em all.