Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts

Monday, July 8, 2019

Advertising in 1957: a Tragicomedy in 3 Parts

Two ads from the same 1957 American magazine featuring Audrey Hepburn and Jayne Mansfield. What's a woman to do?
Have thin legs? Get fuller!
Have "heavy" legs? Slenderize!

Bonus: at least the magazine is comprehensive in its remedies. 

Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Advertising

Advertising is an interesting business. Harley Davidson used to market itself to fishermen, hardly the "bad boy" image the company would later adopt after its motorcycles were featured in Easy Rider (1969). 
Nestle used to market Milo--now primarily a kid's drink--to active adults, touting its vitamins. 
From Singapore's National Library exhibit, "Selling Dreams," 10th Floor (July 2018 to February 2019). 

Friday, June 19, 2009

Note to Rupert Murdoch and the Newspaper Barons

Newspapers must have idiots running their business department. Newspapers price their product in ways that no other retailer would even consider. The current system penalizes long-term subscribers and rewards new ones. For example, the WSJ offers a $119 annual rate to new subscribers and then tries to charge existing customers a $398 renewal rate. That's like Macy's charging its best customers more money for a dress while offering a new, unproven customer a discount. Either give everyone the same price, or offer a discount to the proven subscribers.

If I ran the show, I'd charge a higher initial subscription, say, $200 to $400 a year. Then, each year, the rate would become progressively lower until reaching a minimum of say, $50 a year. However, to get the discounted rate, subscribers would have to agree to disclose some basic personal information useful to advertisers, like gender, age, education, and marital status (not political affiliation or financial information) and to return one advertising survey a year (either online or regular mail). My system would benefit everyone: advertisers, who usually look to target a particular audience, would have better information; newspapers, which are begging for ad dollars, would be able to effectively market to specific advertisers; and subscribers would pay less money for the same product.

Also, newspapers wouldn't have to hire those annoying marketers who call at 9:01AM trying to forcefeed their product to someone who's already received six renewal offers by mail and two by email. Entire telemarketing teams would disappear, as well as the waste that occurs from multiple renewal offers. Newspapers would only have to send one renewal notice with the following message: either subscribe and pay within three weeks, or lose the discounted rate.

Isn't it shocking no one has tried this yet? What am I missing?