There is no arguing that today consumers have a lot of choices, that consumers want products that are relevant and make their life easier/better/faster, and that we are on a boring and lazy trend of having to overtly tell consumers our products are for them–by over-using ‘U’
Last October I wrote a post comparing two uses of the implying ‘You’ – one overtly wrong, one right. Yahoo vs. Bissel [SPOILER: Bissel wins]
Based on this article, I assume no one at Yahoo read my post. Yahoo Wants “It’s You” To Be Theirs.
If they did, they would have moved on from this campaign long ago. So why are brands latching onto the letter ‘U’ at an unfortunate speed? Yes, it is better than ‘i’ but not that much better. Below are a few examples of brands using ‘You’ or ‘U’ and my thoughts on how bad it really is. My scale ranges from: ‘Lazy, with potential’ to ‘Out of touch’
1. Yahoo! = Bad and Out of Touch. Here is the video again and read my previous blog for the full run down
2. Bali Comfort-U = Not terrible, not as Lazy. At least the U is referenced as the actual shape of the product. But the double entendre and copy in the ads places a lot of emphasis on the ‘you’ of ‘U’. Not to mention they used ‘U’ in the product name. However, I don’t hate it. They get one point back for realizing U-comfort sounded terrible, but Comfort-U is only marginally better. [side note: update the video on your site. your facebook video is a final cut, your site video should not be the agency rough cut]
3. Hasbro U-Build Games = Lazy and insulting to moms. While not out with a full campaign yet, Hasbro felt the need to call their new games that players can construct ‘u-build’ versions. I may have hated this less if they went with ‘You Build’. However, from the looks of it, you aren’t ‘building’- you don’t build a puzzle, you put it together.
4. TMobile HTC = fine, but could be better. Reasons they fail. #1 using aspirational, rich ‘celebrities’ paired with ‘YOU’. We get it with the use of a range of ‘celebrities’ that we can customize our HTC phone. And I do not believe for one second that phil jackson or whoopi own or know how to use a smart phone. #2 using ‘You’ to sell MyTouch. too many pronouns. 101 campaign stuff, if you must go down this path- use ‘real’ people if you are trying to convey ‘you’ or have celebrities point out and talk to the you’s.
The second one is much better than the first. Using ‘you’ in a more relatable (and much cheaper) way.
I wonder if Jesse James will make the next ad.
5. U tampons by Kotex= Awesome ads, lazy product name. I give the ads 1000000000 thumbs up. they are funny and relevant. They make me believe, as a consumer, that it is a brand that understands I don’t wear white suits, i don’t dance on day three and i don’t need to see the blue liquid. And then, it happened. The name of the product is U. That is lazy to me. If the brief talks about humanizing things and the insight is tampon commercials are out of touch, it is lazy to name a product U and worse to use neon colors in a splatter formation. But, you win this game because the ads are great.
Any I missed?
Remember, it’s true: every time a brand relies on ‘U’ an angel loses its wings.
the world according to schmogel. 