Saturday, August 25, 2018

Creative (As We Know It) Is Dead


COMMENTARY

Creative (As We Know It) Is Dead

As marketers, we’ve spent decades leaning on the double definition of “creative” to shirk responsibility. We’ve conflated the traditional creativity of artists, writers, and poets, with the creative side of marketing and advertising — the copywriting, art design, and campaign content.

We’ve argued that creativity has a unique human quality that can’t always be explained or measured, and therefore our creative work similarly cannot be measured.
Perhaps there was a time when such arguments held true, back when the Don Drapers of the world sat atop towering skyscrapers. today, we live in a world where every single aspect of a campaign is carefully tracked and measured — every aspect except the actual content.
Times — and technology — have changed. Now we can finally start holding creative teams accountable for delivering campaigns with impact.
Not only do we have the necessary technology to accurately measure the effectiveness of creative, but after decades of tech-driven advancements in marketing, we owe it to our customers to bring a more rigorous level of scrutiny to what we’re saying to them in our marketing. We also owe it to our organizations — our CEOs, CFO, boards  — to approach marketing with a rigor and scrutiny fitting of the investments we make into these efforts.
The beginnings of these changes can be traced to the advent of A/B testing and its application in web analytics and digital marketing. Though rudimentary, this gave us an option to test and optimize copy, adding at least some accountability to the process. But A/B testing has its limits - whether that’s the time it takes to do the tests or the statistical significance of the findings. And in the end, the people writing those A and B options are themselves subjective creatives.
Fortunately, we are standing at the precipice of great change in our industry.
We’ve created powerful tools that are capable of invading people’s homes and lives through myriad channels. And in response, consumers today demand tailored content that speaks to them as individuals, not only in terms of their demographic makeup (table stakes at this point), but in who they are as individuals and what they believe in.
Within the next decade, I foresee the end of broadcast media marketing as we know it, as we develop capabilities to serve targeted content to viewers and make the viewing experience different for everyone. New technologies allow marketers to speak on a 1:1 level to a million of their customers without the need for a million individual copywriters and without wasting a single bullet. This is true personalization.
While creative endeavors have their time and place, when it comes to marketing campaigns, we have an obligation to provide concrete and data-driven reasoning for our creative choices, and to deliver the best results we possibly can. Creative, as we know it, is about to change, and we must all be ready.
Creative is dead. Long live creative.

Monday, August 20, 2018

To Reach Men, Advertisers Dial In to Sports Radio

Radio Ink - Radio's Premier Management and Marketing Magazine


 
ADVERTISING

To Reach Men, Advertisers Dial In to Sports Radio

A Red Sox-Yankees game in Boston earlier this month. Sports radio’s audience skews male and is still a niche segment when compared with the rest of radio, but it is of increasing interest for advertisers.CreditMichael Dwyer/Associated Press

By Jason Notte

·       Aug. 20, 2018
 

Sports programming isn’t the most popular stop on the radio dial in Portland, Ore.

The top sports radio station in June, KFXX-AM, ranked 21st out of the market’s 35 stations, according to Nielsen. Its biggest competitor, KXTG-AM, ranked 22nd. A third, KPOJ-AM, was 25th, just ahead of a jazz station.

Yet the Goldberg Jones law firm in Seattle advertises on all three sports stations.

Rick Jones co-founded the firm in 1996 and helped it establish a niche by providing divorce services for men. At first “the big game was yellow pages” when it came to marketing, he said. Soon, though, the firm turned to radio, which was appealing for both its price and its reach.

“When deciding at that point which stations to target, sports radio stations were a no-brainer because of the demographic,” Mr. Jones said. “The cost per relevant person was manageable and within our budget.”

More than 20 years later, sports radio’s audience remains largely the same. Entercom, the parent company of KFXX, says that the roughly 40 sports radio stations it owns average 11 million listeners per week. Of that audience, 71 percent is male. Ads for Jones’ law firm on KFXX are often bookended by commercials for a chain of testosterone-therapy clinics and for a shaving supply company called Harry’s.

 
“Given the male skew for sports radio, those advertisers may find the format suitable,” says Jeff Sottolano, senior vice president of radio and Radio.com programming from Entercom.

Traug Keller, senior vice president in charge of ESPN Audio and Talent, noted that between 80 and 90 percent of the audience listening to ESPN Radio’s more than 400 affiliates throughout the United States is male. Combined with ESPN’s satellite radio and streaming audio stations, Mr. Keller said ESPN radio reaches one in every five sports-radio listeners ages 13 and older in the United States, and accounts for nearly half of all sports radio listening nationwide.

 “You start to extrapolate out: Half of all sports talk radio listening, 1 in 5 Americans listening to us, 80 to 90 percent male,” Mr. Keller said. “Sports talk radio is probably a good place to go to find men.”

When compared with the rest of radio — not to mention streaming audio and podcasts — sports radio is still a niche, but one of increasing interest for advertisers. John Fitzgerald, vice president of ESPN’s multimedia sales for audio and ESPN Deportes, said that ESPN Radio had about 30 advertisers when he began working with the company 20 years ago. It has more than 300 now, and the field of advertisers has diversified.

“One of the things that advertisers are starting to understand is that sports radio is not your grandfather,” Mr. Fitzgerald said. “We do well with 18 to 49, we do well with 25 to 54, and we do well with 35-plus, but there’s this idea that, this old white guy — and I can say this as an older white guy — and they’re now trapped in what they do and they’re going to do that forever.”

 
 

While ESPN Radio’s listeners are largely male, Mr. Fitzgerald said they vary in race and ethnicity. Fitzgerald also noted that ESPN Radio also has a high number of listeners making between $150,000 to $1 million a year, while Entercom’s Mr. Sottolano said Entercom sports stations and the company’s CBS Radio Network affiliates tend to skew toward the college-educated and households making more than $75,000.

They’re also more engaged than the average radio listener.

“It’s the relationship that a fan has to a sports radio host who, on Monday morning after a big game, is as upset or as emotional as they are,” Mr. Sottolano said. “When they build that kind of relationship and feel that individual is one of them — someone they could have had on the couch on Sunday and been sharing a plate of nachos with — there’s a natural opportunity for us to leverage that trust.”

As a result, sports radio hosts are often enlisted to do endorsements or events. At Entercom’s WFAN-FM in New York, Mike Francesa has a longstanding relationship with the electronics retailer and CBS Radio advertiser Adorama. Angelo Cataldi at Entercom’s WIP-FM has not only endorsed the Philadelphia jeweler Steven Singer on air, but has introduced them as the sponsors of the station’s annual Wing Bowl, a pre-Super Bowl bacchanalia at Philadelphia’s Wells Fargo Center arena featuring exotic dancers, professional eaters and WIP listeners in various states of sobriety.

ESPN’s Mr. Keller said sports radio advertisers once fell into male-focused categories like grooming and beer, but that has changed. The ESPN Radio hosts Dan LeBatard and Jon Weiner, for example, became pitchmen for Zebra pens.

“They did these live reads and all of a sudden, they’re selling a ton of Zebra pens because these knuckleheads said, ‘Hey, this is a good pen,’” Keller says.

That connection isn’t always immediate. Mr. Keller said that ESPN brings many advertisers to its Bristol, Conn., headquarters to sit down with hosts and explain their businesses. The Portland-based Alpha Media, meanwhile, brought representatives from Mr. Jones’s law firm to its KXTG studios to discuss sports-related family law issues, including Tiger Woods’ extramarital affairs.

“Things like that are gold because it’s an implied endorsement and you’re welcomed into the family a bit,” Mr. Jones said. “Especially when you’re in a business like divorce lawyer, the implied endorsement is the one you’re looking for. Nobody wants to be the show host who says “when I went through the worst period of my life, here’s who I used.’”

 

Answers To Some Great Questions About Outcome-Based TV Ad Selling

COMMENTARY

Answers To Some Great Questions About Outcome-Based TV Ad Selling

  • by  , Featured Contributor, August 16, 2018
The following was posted in a previous edition of Media Insider.

“How can anyone promise sales outcomes -- and then also work with your competitors?” That was one of several questions posed by Joe Marchese recently on big industry stages.

Joe, president of advertising revenue at Fox Networks Group, is not shy with opinions, and has emerged as one of the strongest voices for change in the advertising industry.
He's also not alone in his criticism of recent trends to sell TV ads based on marketers’ desired business outcomes, not just traditional media delivery metrics like gross rating points and cost per thousand.
Specifically, Joe asked how a TV company could sell outcomes to competing advertisers -- and also, whether it’s really possible to provide true attribution for sales of some products. In particular, he questioned the validity of whether any one spot or campaign for a car can really be tied to specific short-term sales of that car.
I’m sure you all might have opinions on what the answers are -- but here are mine:
Outcome selling does not work for all consumer categories. There’s no question that TV advertising’s ability to drive attributable short-term sales varies widely from category to category. With large-scale databases of person impression-level TV set-top-box data, it’s quite possible to have very accurate attribution for retail sales of consumer packaged goods, and be able to predictably sell those outcomes.
The same cannot be said for high-ticket, longer-term considered purchases like cars and trucks. I don’t believe that category will be very easy to attribute or sell on outcomes.
Selling outcomes to competitors means they bid up ad prices by results rather than opportunity to be seen. Selling outcomes is not how most TV companies like to operate, but that doesn’t mean you can’t sell outcome guarantees to both Walmart, Kroger and Amazon at the same time.
In the future, all TV companies must do so. It’s how Google and Facebook operate, and how they drive such great profits. They sell marketers want they want -- results -- with little risk. Those companies bid against each to get those results and keep those “acquired customers” away from each other.
That means higher prices and more inventory yield for the media owner. Adopting a performance-pricing model over time is a good thing for TV.
There’s no question that embracing outcome-based selling represents a difficult transition for TV companies. It requires different metrics. It is typically a client-direct sale. It requires different types of sales skills and sales personnel, and different accounting.
This change will be wrenching, but the end result will be good. TV companies will get much better prices than they do today, since they will be fully valued for their contributions to sales and will reshape all pricing, packaging and inventory allocations for maximum result.
This won’t happen overnight, but it will happen soon. What do you think?

Where Is TV's Biggest Ad Category - Autos - Driving In Future?

COMMENTARY

Where Is TV's Biggest Ad Category - Autos - Driving In Future?

TV stations increasingly are worried about the future of automotive advertising -- the biggest ad category and a key revenue generator for traditional TV.
Linear TV has seen 2% to 5% declines in auto advertising in the last few years, according to BIA Advisory Services. Marketers are moving to cheaper digital advertising, including “real-time” mobile advertising. Those declines may seem small, but are also significant.
In that regard, we have the Video Advertising Bureau taking up this key TV ad issue.
The VAB says there are still a lot of positives for TV. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2017 -- the fourth quarter being the big automotive selling season, where 31% of those marketers' TV dollars are spent  -- saw a 13% year-over-year increase in TV ad spend to $4.1 billion. (Other quarters were not part of the analysis.)
The good news, per the VAB, is that it appears TV advertising equals specific digital media gains in terms of unique visitors -- a good engagement measure.
Looking at the top 24 automotive advertisers in this period, 11 of those marketers spent 15% more and got nearly 50% more unique online visitors. Eight advertisers that spent 15% fewer dollars got nearly 30% fewer unique digital visitors. What about the other six? The VAB says there was a “lack of correlation” between TV spend and unique visitors.
The VAB results come from the top TV auto marketers' ad spend, analyzing fourth-quarter 2017 brand website traffic, search, social media and online video views, as well as TV ad spend from comScore MediaMetrix and Nielsen Ad Intel data.
Still, this isn’t enough. Other TV analysts believe TV stations need more specific data to help grow overall automotive marketing on TV. Should it also include third-party consumer data, incorporating specific ROI guarantees based on marketers first-party marketers’ data?
TV stations' current data efforts are still based largely around Nielsen’s TV viewing data, as well as those sometimes iffy local TV market samples. Adding in digital media sales tools seem to take a back seat.
TV stations have been slow to make the necessary digital media transformations to their businesses, according to many executives.
Still, TV stations have a lot of sway -- and pull -- when it comes to big brand awareness appeal.  At the same time, TV stations continue to tout strong political advertising and retransmission revenues as big selling points for the future.

Thursday, August 16, 2018

Answers To Some Great Questions About Outcome-Based TV Ad Selling


COMMENTARY

Answers To Some Great Questions About Outcome-Based TV Ad Selling

  • by  , Featured Contributor, 16 minutes ago
The following was posted in a previous edition of Media Insider.

“How can anyone promise sales outcomes -- and then also work with your competitors?” That was one of several questions posed by Joe Marchese recently on big industry stages.

Joe, president of advertising revenue at Fox Networks Group, is not shy with opinions, and has emerged as one of the strongest voices for change in the advertising industry.
He's also not alone in his criticism of recent trends to sell TV ads based on marketers’ desired business outcomes, not just traditional media delivery metrics like gross rating points and cost per thousand.
Specifically, Joe asked how a TV company could sell outcomes to competing advertisers -- and also, whether it’s really possible to provide true attribution for sales of some products. In particular, he questioned the validity of whether any one spot or campaign for a car can really be tied to specific short-term sales of that car.
I’m sure you all might have opinions on what the answers are -- but here are mine:
Outcome selling does not work for all consumer categories. There’s no question that TV advertising’s ability to drive attributable short-term sales varies widely from category to category. With large-scale databases of person impression-level TV set-top-box data, it’s quite possible to have very accurate attribution for retail sales of consumer packaged goods, and be able to predictably sell those outcomes.
The same cannot be said for high-ticket, longer-term considered purchases like cars and trucks. I don’t believe that category will be very easy to attribute or sell on outcomes.
Selling outcomes to competitors means they bid up ad prices by results rather than opportunity to be seen. Selling outcomes is not how most TV companies like to operate, but that doesn’t mean you can’t sell outcome guarantees to both Walmart, Kroger and Amazon at the same time.
In the future, all TV companies must do so. It’s how Google and Facebook operate, and how they drive such great profits. They sell marketers want they want -- results -- with little risk. Those companies bid against each to get those results and keep those “acquired customers” away from each other.
That means higher prices and more inventory yield for the media owner. Adopting a performance-pricing model over time is a good thing for TV.
There’s no question that embracing outcome-based selling represents a difficult transition for TV companies. It requires different metrics. It is typically a client-direct sale. It requires different types of sales skills and sales personnel, and different accounting.
This change will be wrenching, but the end result will be good. TV companies will get much better prices than they do today, since they will be fully valued for their contributions to sales and will reshape all pricing, packaging and inventory allocations for maximum result.
This won’t happen overnight, but it will happen soon. What do you think?

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Selling ideas when you’re the new leader on the block



Selling ideas when you’re the new leader on the block
And wow, there are so many opportunity for improvement; the list of ideas is a mile long! It’s exciting, and you’re ready to start making some changes.

Hold up there, partner. Although your enthusiasm is admirable, take a momentary pause. Before you start pitching ideas for change, know this: if you go about it the wrong way, you’ll get the cold shoulder. Worse, you might earn a reputation for not understanding the company’s culture, which could have long-lasting implications for your success.

Selling ideas when you’re the new leader on the block takes a strategic mindset, which can get overlooked in the rush of excitement or pressure to produce immediate results. Here are five things to consider to help make your case more persuasively:

Patience is a virtue

This is especially true if you’re a leader of leaders, because you have multiple constituencies to nurture and communicate with. New ideas that require a deviation from the status quo require patience, observes a senior manager with Kelly Services in this article about stepping up to senior management. “Everybody is in a different part of the journey to incorporate the change,” she notes, so it’s important to curb your enthusiasm. Even if you’re ready to roll, others most likely are not.

Don’t blow things up just yet

Some leaders are brought in to “shake things up” and they take that advice to heart. The only problem is, sometimes they shake so hard that people are concussed. Although it might be that the entire corporate ecosystem needs a reboot, people in the trenches (as well as your middle management team, who will be your allies in communicating change) need time to adjust. Look around and decide if you need to wait or go into immediate triage mode.

Determine what the culture will support

No matter how great your solution is, some cultures simply won’t support it. When selling your idea, “find where the culture works in your favor,” advises leadership coach Eric Hicks, who held senior management positions at Cigna and JPMorgan Chase before starting his coaching consultancy. He admits to learning this the hard way. “You are not really likely to implement programs or ideas that are significantly counter to culture in your first 90 days,” he says. And it doesn’t help to say, “at my previous employer, this worked well,” he notes. If anything, that signals the kiss of death for an idea.

Take a page from marketers

Savvy communicators know that it takes time for people to gain comfort with new ideas. If your idea is radical, make it seem more familiar by pairing it with something that audience already understands. This concept, coined “MAYA” by industrial designer Raymond Loewy, stands for "Most Advanced Yet Acceptable." For example, when online eyeglasses retailer Warby Parker was in its startup phase, it had to overcome the objection of how people would get fitted for eyewear online. The company was dubbed the “Netflix of Eyewear.” Pair your idea with something that people can relate to, and it will gain traction more quickly.

Co-create with others

This final idea is less about sales and more about enlisting others. “You need to really take some time to understand the nuances of the culture” before you pitch ideas,” says Hicks. People will support that which they help to create. Rather than “sell” people on a solution, look for ways to draw people into your idea and work with them to co-create a solution that all will support.
It’s understandable that a leaders who’s new to the job wants to make an immediate and positive impact. Before you make any big moves, be sure you’ve taken the time to ensure that the company’s culture, along with your key constituencies, are on board with your ideas. Patience, collaboration and savvy marketing will go a long way to paving the road to success for new ideas you wish to implement.

Jennifer V. Miller is a freelance writer and leadership development consultant. She helps business professionals lead themselves and others towards greater career success. Join her Facebook community The People Equation and sign up for her free tip sheet: “Why is it So Hard to Shut Up? 18 Ways to THINK before you Speak.”

Connected TV Ad Spend Poised To Hit $8.2 Billion In 2018

8
Advertising on connected TV is poised to nearly double this year  -- to $8.2 billion, according to Tru Optik.
The video/data management company says it will climb to'$13.3 billion in 2019 and $20.1 billion in 2020. It was $4.7 billion a year ago.
Ninety-seven percent of those buying targeted connected TV ad campaigns, are using third-party data to direct their ads, with 2% coming from first party data and 1% from retargeting.
Tru Optik estimates the overall over the top (OTT) industry will hit $50 billion in 2020.  It says less than a fourth of OTT spending comes from marketers linear TV ad budget; 33% from its digital ad budget. Recent projections are that 62% of marketers plan to increase OTT spending.
According to a number of projections, traditional TV advertising spending totals around $70 billion annually.
A recent estimate from software company SteelHouse said nearly 80%  of marketers plan to buy ad inventory on connected TV devices and services in the next 12 months.

Scripps Sells 19 To SummitMedia for $47 million

The 19 stations in 4 markets Scripps still had in its portfolio will soon be gone, sold to Carl Parmer’s SummitMedia for $47 million. This is the fourth and final transaction in the sale of Scripps’ radio assets. The sales of Scripps’ radio stations total $83.5 million. million. The company announced in January its intent to sell its portfolio of 34 radio stations in eight markets.

SummitMedia is purchasing:
  • KFDI (101.3 FM), KICT (95.1 FM), KFXJ (104.5 FM), KYQQ (106.5 FM) and KFTI (1070 AM) in Wichita, Kansas;
  • KTTS (94.7 FM), KSPW (96.5 FM), KSGF (104.1 FM and 1260 AM) and KRVI (106.7 FM) in Springfield, Missouri;
  • KEZO (92.3 FM), KSRZ (104.5 FM), KQCH (94.1 FM), KKCD (105.9 FM) and ESPN station KXSP (590 AM) in Omaha, Nebraska; and
  • WWST (102.1 FM), WCYQ (100.3 FM), WKHT (104.5 FM) and WNOX (931. FM) in Knoxville, Tennessee.

  •   Scripps already had announced the sale of five radio stations in Tulsa to Griffin Communications, two Milwaukee-based radio stations to Good Karma and eight stations in Boise and Tucson to Lotus.
    The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter. The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter.

Summer TV Viewing Sees Another Double-Digit Percentage Decline

Television News Daily

Summer TV viewing is showing no improvement in declining viewership among virtually all networks.

Only Fox, MTV, Comedy Central had much to cheer about in July -- the only TV networks showing gains in that month versus the same month a year before, according to MoffettNathanson Research.
Prime-time TV was down 12% during the month to a Nielsen C3 18-49 viewership of 16 million -- with broadcast losing 10% and cable networks down 13%. June's total TV prime-time ratings were down 9% and May lost 5%.

The Nielsen C3 metric is the average minute commercial rating plus three days of time-shifted viewing.

Total day viewership posted slightly worse results, falling 13% to an average 10 million total C3 18-49 viewers -- with broadcast losing 8% and cable off 15%.

Fox benefited from the World Cup in July -- posting a 5% gain to average 836,000 18-49 C3 viewers in prime time. ABC was down 6% to 838,000, while CBS went 15% south to 744,000 and NBC lost 17% to 997,000.

Viacom's Comedy Central added 16,000 total day 18-49 C3 viewers in the month and its sister network MTV added 4,000 more. But Viacom also had some big losers.

Among the top 25 cable networks, Nickelodeon was down 93,000 and Nick-at-Nite was off 89,000.
Looking at overall TV cable network groups, Fox did the best among the losers -- down 4% to 1.1 million prime-time C3 18-49 viewers for all its networks, while Discovery dropped 6% to 2.5 million. Viacom sank 8% to 2.3 million, A+E Networks was 10% lower to 998,000, and NBCUniversal was off 14% to 1.6 million.

The next four were Time Warner, dropping 16% to 1.8 million; all independent networks, also giving up 16% to 910,000; AMC Networks declined 17%  to 522,000, and Disney-ABC sank 28% to 640,000.

Aerosmith to Rock Vegas in 2019

Hello Las Vegas, are you ready to rock?

Aerosmith announced on Wednesday they have a new concert residency at the Park Theater at the new Park MGM resort in Las Vegas in 2019. The show is titled Aerosmith: Deuces Are Wild, named after the band's 1993 song, and the performances will begin in April.

"We decided to do Vegas. Viva Las Aerosmith!" frontman Steven Tyler said onstage at Rockefeller Plaza in New York City, before the group performed a gig for the Today show's summer concert series.

"We're gonna keep it raw, we're gonna keep it who were are," he added later. "There are gonna be no changes. It's not gonna be Flory-Dories, it's gonna be beautiful and rocked out and we're gonna get a chance to use some special effects that haven't been used before."

Aerosmith's residency show will feature never-seen-before visuals and audio from the band's recording sessions, with the help of Grammy-winning producer Giles Martin, who creating the soundscape for The Beatles LOVE by Cirque du Soleil show in Las Vegas.

"We wanna bring a show in there that we really can't do when we're on the road, on a regular tour," guitarist Joe Perry said. "We wanna bring a show that still has Aerosmith and all the guts of Aerosmith but has a whole other element to it that we've never been able to do before."

"We're gonna bring you into Aerosmith World," said drummer Joey Kramer. "The history behind our almost 50 years of being together and as soon as you walk into the Park Theatre in Vegas, you're gonna walk into Aerosmith World. Everything about it is gonna be Aerosmith, Aerosmith, Aerosmith."

Could Climate Change Destroy the Bloody Mary?

Thought we'd begin enhancing this media news site with additional points of interest such as information from the food industry which impacts our daily lives and and the entertainment business, both of which is of great interest to all our subscribers to LeNoble's Media Sales Insights

So...here's the first of many interesting articles which may affect our lives: PLease let us know how much you enjoy them as they are published. You may write to me at drphilipjay@gmail.com. That way I'll get your comments more quickly.


The Result of More GLOBAL WARMING Could Climate Change Destroy the Bloody Mary? “The entire global food system is a nightmare on the horizon.”

By Clint Rainey

This drink might look a little different in the next few decades. 
At this point, we’ve all just made peace with the idea that climate change will devastate the Earth, right? As far as food is concerned, it is now easy to imagine a world without coffee, wine, bananas, avocados, chocolate, crops whose mere presence in the world’s food supply is threatened by a warming planet. But some climate-change experts stress the fact that complete extinction is less of a threat than the ways smaller adjustments will affect our food chain. “The unpredictable ways in which our food system takes up shocks and stressors is the really compelling story here and it is going hugely under-reported,” says Ed Carr, director of Clark University’s international development, community, and environment department. “The entire global food system is a nightmare on the horizon.”

Carr warns that our modern food system is interconnected in ways we will fail to truly grasp until “a single shock or stress impacts the system.” He says, “Add multiple shocks, or even several moving parts, and that uncertainty compounds.”
Take, for example, that iconic brunch drink, the Bloody Mary. It is often calledthe world’s most complex cocktail due to the sheer amount of stuff that’s in it. Even a normal Bloody Mary — one that isn’t garnished with, say, raw oysters or an entire fried chicken — contains far more ingredients than you might think (Worcestershire sauce alone contains over a dozen separate components), any one of which could be a victim of climate change in the future. “You look at the glass and go, ‘A lot is going on in there,’” explains Michael Hoffmann, who runs the Cornell Institute for Climate Smart Solutions. “But if you take the pieces one by one, you start realizing tomorrow’s Bloody Mary is going to taste very different.”

How different? Scientists can’t definitively say how flavors will shift. It depends on whether the environmental stressors manifest as rainfall declines, or perhaps a long-forgotten disease emerging from melted Arctic ice. (That really happened, btw.) What the experts we talked to can agree on is that the ingredients that make up your favorite Bloody are in for a rough few decades of change. And, yes, the loss or change of boozy tomato juice is — in the grand scheme of things — admittedly trivial, yet examining each ingredient of this classic hangover cure is also, ahem, a surprisingly eye-opening way to get a grasp on the ways in which our changing climate could affect our food supply. Here’s how it looks:

Tomatoes
The one constant across all Bloody Mary recipes is also the most susceptible to change. Nutrient depletion has wracked tomatoes for years; the standard, garden-variety version of the fruit continues to leach vital nutrients like vitamin C and calcium. According to one influential report, the atmosphere itself may be to blame due to rising CO2 levels. Scientists have found that higher temperatures increase the odds of plants getting a disease called blossom-end rot, which make them ripen more slowly, decreases their fruit size, and reduces natural sweetness. Once temperatures soar above 90 degrees, just kiss tomatoes good-bye entirely: The plant won’t blossom in such heat. It will sacrifice flowers to conserve moisture, and fruit that’s already on the vine will, for example, turn an unappetizing shade of yellow.

Vodka
Vodka can be made from a variety of different ingredients, but the outlook is pretty bleak for all of them. Researcherspredict climate change will have a “profound effect” on potatoes in warm climates like India, and in the next two decades, global yields are predicted to drop by as much as 32 percent. By 2060, it’s possible Bolivia will be the only place on Earth that doesn’t have to drastically change its farming practices to maintain the current yield. The U.N. also warnsthat the biodiversity of potatoes is under global threat.

High rollers, meanwhile, might want to know that Grey Goose is made with wheat instead of potatoes, but those grains are grown in Picardy, a region in northern France where a new study predicts precipitation shortages and hotter weather will shrink yields 21 percent by century’s end. And Tito’s, America’s top-selling spirits brand, is distilled from corn. Carr points out that the Corn Belt is in trouble: Models predict a 6 degree temperature increase for parts of the midwest over the next half century and, in two generations, Canada may produce much of the corn that America does now.

Hot sauce
Rising sea levels are quite literally drowning Tabasco, the crucial Bloody Mary ingredient produced by Louisiana’s McIlhenny family: The company is headquartered on Avery Island, Louisiana, a salt dome by the Gulf of Mexico that’s headed underwater, along with one of the country’s largest salt mines. The peppers used to make the sauce are actually grown in Central and South America, but that only ensures supply, not quality. Research shows warming temperatures have a metaphorically apt consequence for chiles: Heat stress on the plant increases capsaicin, which means the peppers get hotter in their own way. Droughts have already caused shortages of some other pepper varieties, like of the chiltepin in northern Mexico, and others as traced in the excellent 2011 book Chasing Chiles.

Lemons
Lemon production is concentrated in coastal regions with similar climates, and the crop is sensitive to dramatic temperature changes — fruits that ripen too quickly become bitter. They’re also vulnerable to disease and hurricanes, which are becoming more frequent and severe, and that in turn translates to price volatility. They’re also practically amonoculture crop; the more similar they are, the more susceptible the entire supply becomes to any unexpected “shock,” which would mean a serious citrus decline.

Worcestershire sauce
The classic condiment requires fermented anchovies which, like all fish, are in grave danger of going extinct. (The most dire warnings predict edible fish could disappear as soon 2048.) Already, the anchovy population off of California’s coast has seen total collapse: It dropped from 1 million tons in 2009 to just 15,000 tons in 2011.

Horseradish
A majority of North America’s horseradish production comes from just two counties in southern Illinois. A sole environmental stressor to the area could decimate supplies of the pungent root. In fact, it almost happened once, in 2002, when a fungus nearly wiped it out. It’s not like farmers could just start planting it somewhere else. As the Washington Post explained at the time, “There are no seeds for root crops. Instead, offshoots the size of carrots are separated from the thick part of the horseradish by hand, then replanted in the loose, rich soil of this stretch of Mississippi River bottom land.”

Ice
Consider different types of water, and the individual traits they confer on drinks. As Hoffmann says, “You have to think about that in addition to the Tabasco, tomatoes, vodka, and all of that.” And, surprise, climate change is throwing a real wrench in the nutrients found in water, which is also a reliable conduit for pollutants, second only to air. As the EPA warns, bad things are in store for the “amount, timing, form, and intensity” of rainfall, and those problems will inevitably threaten our water resources. Algal blooms now routinely taint our lakes and rivers; and a recent study in Science points out extreme storms will wash in larger quantities of nitrogen — possibly 20 percent more, by the end of the century. Freak downpours also create runoff that flows into our water supplies, after picking up pollutants, animal waste, sediment, and other trash along the way.

Black pepper
A few dashes of salt and fresh-ground black pepper are necessary finishing touches for any great Bloody, but that pepper could be a problem. Vietnam and India are the biggest producers, and output in both areas is at its maximum. In fact, production bases are shrinking. It’s a rain-fed crop, and researchers call the warm, dry recent years a cause of “great concern,” particularly because there’s a fear the shifting weather could bring in new pests and pathogens, too.

Celery
This is the one spot of good news, if you want to call it that. It turns out everyone’s least favorite vegetable is surprisingly resilient. U.K. scientists investigated greenhouse gas effects on the vegetable last year, and according totheir data, “There was no effect of increased temperature on above ground celery yield.” Um, great?

Celery
Celery’s apparent invincibility notwithstanding, experts are clear about the fact that shocks and stressors have already affected these ingredients (and plenty of others) in meaningful ways — and the issues that we already understand are actually the least troubling. “I’m not worried about what I know will happen — we can plan for that,” Carr says. “I worry about what I don’t know.” He adds that the sheer number of possible threats is simply overwhelming, and all it takes is bad luck. “It could be one, or three, or a million. They just have to happen at the wrong time and the wrong place, and we have a mess on our hands.”

Thursday, August 2, 2018

What Makes A Great CMO In Today's Market


COMMENTARY

I spent the last 10 to 15 years doing lots of B2B marketing and speaking to the enterprise. Prior to that, I worked on consumer brands like Disney, Discover Communications and BMW.

One thing I’ve come to realize in the last year or so is that your day-to-day skills change dramatically the further along you go in your career, because the daunting requirements for marketing and marketing technology change just as much.
I would bet if you did an informal study of CMOs ( Chief Marketing Officer) with more than 20 years of practical marketing experience, you’d come across two high-level pieces of feedback.  
First you would hear that the general principles of marketing apply to both B2B and B2C. I would agree with that.  The basics of understanding your audience, identifying their motivations and delivering a message that resonates are core to being an effective marketer.   
Secondly, I think you would hear that tactically those CMOs will admit they are completely out of their comfort zone when it comes to the daily execution of their marketing strategies.
Tactically, things change all the time.  For example, app marketing is a world unto itself.  Getting consumers to be aware of an app and its value requires an extremely granular approach of influencing the influencers.  Influencer marketing at this level goes down to community marketing, reviews, SEO and more.  Each of these are tactics which are highly focused on products, features and specifications.  You can certainly go the route of marketing benefits and emotional attachment with an app, but these are like capturing lightning in a bottle.
 Most CMOs are trained in higher-level approaches and are vastly outgunned when it comes to the street-level tactics of influencer marketing at this guerrilla level.  Most apps are simply trying to leverage app stores and search to reach a wider audience in the hope that happy users become “raving fans” and they start to share the word.  
Most CMO’s have never been in the trenches manipulating keywords in the app store, so they rely on a valuable tactical team to get these things done.  If you catch a virtual wave and get some traction, then other influencers pick up on it and the word starts to spread by itself.  The same can be applied in a B2B environment, but it’s much more difficult.  
One amazing example of this is Slack, which was able to gain traction and create virality in the developer world and eventually saw that virality catch hold in other areas of business as well
If you are a CMO and you have never truly executed these tactics by yourself, how can you succeed?  How do you battle the fact that most CMOs don’t last in their roles beyond two or three years?  The best way to do so is get out of your own way and focus on what you do know.  Good CMOs will build a great team, manage that team productively and put their ego to the side, surrounding themselves with people who are at least as smart — if not smarter — than they are.  
Your job is to understand the high-level needs of your target and whether these tactics are delivering a message that resonates, and that delivers the accountable metrics your business requires to succeed.  
As a CMO, you can’t be the best at everything your company needs to be done, but you can be the best person to identify the needs and find solutions, then manage the team to execute and exceed those goals.   
To be a great CMO, you need to be the voice of your customer and you need to be the voice for your team.  You need to translate one to the other and vice versa, and then you can achieve success.