Economists generally define a “two speed economy” as one in which different sectors are performing significantly differently at the same time. Generally, I have observed the two speed occurrence in markets where there has been significant natural resource activity. Venezuela, Nigeria, even Canada during oil or metal booms were great examples and Australian in 2012 was a recent entry when it seemed that their entire commodity, coal and base metal output was shipped to China. Those involved with the boom sector(s) were doing great while some miles away boarded up storefronts and unemployed citizens were the norm.
Today, we see the two-speed economy really hitting its stride in the United States consumer arena. Online shopping continues to boom and brick and mortar retailing is to put it charitably, challenged. Look at our holiday season sales if you need verification.
Why bring this up in MR? Well, a number of people have asked me to provide a 2017 media forecast. I have politely responded to each with the comment that I have never in my life been more uncertain about the US or global economy or what our new political leadership will do next year. So, a forecast with any specificity seems impossible at this point.
What I am certain of is that a “two-speed media economy” will likely get even more pronounced relative to 2016. Conventional or legacy media will continue to garner a smaller share of the advertising pie with absolute declines likely in Local TV, newspaper and national magazines. Digital and social media should see solid gains with mobile being a big winner regardless of overall economic performance.
I wish all of you a happy, healthy and very prosperous 2017. This year I heard from readers in over 100 countries and appeared to have been read by professionals in 152 countries. I love to hear from you and thank you for your constant encouragement.
If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Wednesday, December 21, 2016
Mr. Market and The Media World
Sometimes people refer to markets as if they were actually people. If you watch CNBC and Bloomberg as I often do, a commentator or Wall Street type may something akin to “the market thinks that stocks are overextended” or that “the world is awash in oil.” Where did this come from? As best as I can tell, it came from Benjamin Graham’s 1949 book, THE INTELLIGENT INVESTOR. He was more famous for his early book SECURITY ANALYSIS and for being Warren Buffett’s teacher in the Columbia M.B.A. program and his first real employer (I reread the Intelligent Investor annually with emphasis on his discussion of Mr. Market and also “the Margin of Safety”).
Graham essentially says that Mr. Market is bi-polar. He toggles back and forth between crazy optimism and downright despair. Graham says that there are times when Mr. Market offers you ridiculously high prices for your shares (no matter how small a piece of a business) and others when his offer is obscenely low. The trick, according to Graham, is to give your shares to Mr. Market when they are high, and buy more when he offers you little for them provided the underlying business is sound.
Some years back, I tried to use this approach with advertisers. In the 1970’s and in to the early “80’s, media pricing in broadcast moved pretty much in lockstep. In good times, all 200+ markets were able to mark their prices up and in recessions, prices fell across the board in a fairly predictable pattern. Since then, prices have been less uniform. Boom towns experienced booms and rust belt and rural areas tended to have little pricing power.
So, when recession or booms times hit, I would sit with clients and sometimes tell them to avoid certain Nielsen Designated Market Areas (DMA’s) as they remained pricey on a per person basis but go stronger in to other areas where things were so soft that we could find no bottom in pricing or receive great RELATIVE value.
This did not go over well within my shop. Management reps would tell me that I was walking away from easy billing. My response was that we were tossing money down the toilet as the prices were way too high and there were many markets out there where we could do well with recession resistant products and sell more cases given how much more bang we received for our advertising buck.
I would also suggest that we shift to radio as sales often skewed toward metro areas rather than an entire TV market. My internal critics saw me as a troublemaker. I wanted to do more labor intensive market by market work and sometimes cut budgets back until there was a return to normalcy in media pricing in certain localities. When attacked, I always said that I was thinking of the long term interests of the client(s). It generally did not play well.
In the early days of digital, a similar pattern occurred when players did not know how to price their on line properties. We witnessed some temporary spectacular bargains as well as ripoffs. Today, with more knowledge of delivery and huge players buying on exchanges, wild inequities are not so prevalent.
With conventional media, the Mr. Market approach still has some validity. A smart client may see you as a hero if you save them a seven figure sum and still increase case sales for their product. Just do not expect a warm welcome inside your shop unless management has a true long term horizon.
May I wish MR readers around the world, a very Merry Christmas.
If you would like to reach Don Cole directly, you may contact him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Graham essentially says that Mr. Market is bi-polar. He toggles back and forth between crazy optimism and downright despair. Graham says that there are times when Mr. Market offers you ridiculously high prices for your shares (no matter how small a piece of a business) and others when his offer is obscenely low. The trick, according to Graham, is to give your shares to Mr. Market when they are high, and buy more when he offers you little for them provided the underlying business is sound.
Some years back, I tried to use this approach with advertisers. In the 1970’s and in to the early “80’s, media pricing in broadcast moved pretty much in lockstep. In good times, all 200+ markets were able to mark their prices up and in recessions, prices fell across the board in a fairly predictable pattern. Since then, prices have been less uniform. Boom towns experienced booms and rust belt and rural areas tended to have little pricing power.
So, when recession or booms times hit, I would sit with clients and sometimes tell them to avoid certain Nielsen Designated Market Areas (DMA’s) as they remained pricey on a per person basis but go stronger in to other areas where things were so soft that we could find no bottom in pricing or receive great RELATIVE value.
This did not go over well within my shop. Management reps would tell me that I was walking away from easy billing. My response was that we were tossing money down the toilet as the prices were way too high and there were many markets out there where we could do well with recession resistant products and sell more cases given how much more bang we received for our advertising buck.
I would also suggest that we shift to radio as sales often skewed toward metro areas rather than an entire TV market. My internal critics saw me as a troublemaker. I wanted to do more labor intensive market by market work and sometimes cut budgets back until there was a return to normalcy in media pricing in certain localities. When attacked, I always said that I was thinking of the long term interests of the client(s). It generally did not play well.
In the early days of digital, a similar pattern occurred when players did not know how to price their on line properties. We witnessed some temporary spectacular bargains as well as ripoffs. Today, with more knowledge of delivery and huge players buying on exchanges, wild inequities are not so prevalent.
With conventional media, the Mr. Market approach still has some validity. A smart client may see you as a hero if you save them a seven figure sum and still increase case sales for their product. Just do not expect a warm welcome inside your shop unless management has a true long term horizon.
May I wish MR readers around the world, a very Merry Christmas.
If you would like to reach Don Cole directly, you may contact him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Wednesday, December 14, 2016
Something Will Turn Up
A long time ago I went to a Christian Brothers Academy in Rhode Island. I did not like the brothers and they did not like me. Yet, the school had one redeeming feature. In each of my high school years several lay teachers exposed me to some good literature. I recall having to read three Charles Dickens novels--Great Expectations, A Tale of Two Cities, and David Copperfield.
My favorite Dickensian character was Wilkins Micawber who was in David Copperfield, published in 1850. He was always in financial straits and was said to be loosely based on the author's father, John Dickens, who once served time in debtor's prison.
A famous Micawber quote from Copperfield is "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound nought and six, result misery."
Micawber could never live within his means. Yet, he was a buoyant optimist. I vividly remember the Cliff notes describing him as "living in hopeful expectation."
The struggling character, Micawber, when up against the financial wall, would often say--"Something will turn up." This phrase or attitude strikes me as how companies and governments are reacting to the tech revolution both in terms of long term employment and effective marketing.
Let’s face it. We are in a period of creative destruction. (See Media Realism, “Schumpeter Lives in 2009 Media, 1/30/09). The problem is that the technology or digital boom is different from previous business cycles. What people do not seem to grasp is that tech does not move smoothly or predictably. Technology is not there to create jobs; it is growing as it allows innovators to cut costs and steal market share from old tech forms (i.e., conventional media or brick and mortar retail). The benefit of tech is that it allows you to do more with less, especially people. Government solutions are often more spending in existing systems that would not alleviate the problem.
So, many jobs lost as technology grows (robots in factories or in fast food joints, self drive cars and trucks, and in mining) will never be replaced. Can anyone turn this around? Some World War II style mobilization to move us from reliance on fossil fuels to alternative energy would be a possibility but no clear program has seen the light of day and political resistance from pressure groups would be huge. A massive infrastructure build-out would create many blue collar jobs for a few years but, again, is it politically viable as it is sure to be a budget buster?
In the media world, I continue to talk with people who remain in denial about the last 15 years. Local broadcasters say that when the economy bounces back more strongly, so will they in a big way. Have they forgotten about commercial avoidance? Do Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and DVR’s have any significance? How about viewing with another device in play as well? Even the most slow witted broadcasters have to see this but the denial continues.
Clearly, old models no longer apply. The psychological foundation for a conventional media revival no longer exists. Our world has changed for good.
So, will something turn up for either displaced workers or conventional media? Sorry, Mr. Micawber. I just do not see it.
If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
My favorite Dickensian character was Wilkins Micawber who was in David Copperfield, published in 1850. He was always in financial straits and was said to be loosely based on the author's father, John Dickens, who once served time in debtor's prison.
A famous Micawber quote from Copperfield is "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound nought and six, result misery."
Micawber could never live within his means. Yet, he was a buoyant optimist. I vividly remember the Cliff notes describing him as "living in hopeful expectation."
The struggling character, Micawber, when up against the financial wall, would often say--"Something will turn up." This phrase or attitude strikes me as how companies and governments are reacting to the tech revolution both in terms of long term employment and effective marketing.
Let’s face it. We are in a period of creative destruction. (See Media Realism, “Schumpeter Lives in 2009 Media, 1/30/09). The problem is that the technology or digital boom is different from previous business cycles. What people do not seem to grasp is that tech does not move smoothly or predictably. Technology is not there to create jobs; it is growing as it allows innovators to cut costs and steal market share from old tech forms (i.e., conventional media or brick and mortar retail). The benefit of tech is that it allows you to do more with less, especially people. Government solutions are often more spending in existing systems that would not alleviate the problem.
So, many jobs lost as technology grows (robots in factories or in fast food joints, self drive cars and trucks, and in mining) will never be replaced. Can anyone turn this around? Some World War II style mobilization to move us from reliance on fossil fuels to alternative energy would be a possibility but no clear program has seen the light of day and political resistance from pressure groups would be huge. A massive infrastructure build-out would create many blue collar jobs for a few years but, again, is it politically viable as it is sure to be a budget buster?
In the media world, I continue to talk with people who remain in denial about the last 15 years. Local broadcasters say that when the economy bounces back more strongly, so will they in a big way. Have they forgotten about commercial avoidance? Do Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and DVR’s have any significance? How about viewing with another device in play as well? Even the most slow witted broadcasters have to see this but the denial continues.
Clearly, old models no longer apply. The psychological foundation for a conventional media revival no longer exists. Our world has changed for good.
So, will something turn up for either displaced workers or conventional media? Sorry, Mr. Micawber. I just do not see it.
If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Monday, December 5, 2016
The Public Relations Renaissance?
Let me be candid upfront. Historically, advertising people did not always have the highest regard for those who practiced Public Relations (PR). The take was that the advertising and marketing people felt that they did the heavy lifting when it came to getting a brand recognition and acceptance while the PR people would get a blurb in a local newspaper and be strutting while sitting down about what they had accomplished. Some found them to be such lightweights that behind their backs they referred to PR staffers as “the flak.”
Well. Having said that, I am convinced that things will change somewhat over the next several years. Of the seven pillars of Integrated Marketing Communications (Advertising, Direct Marketing, Internet Marketing, Promotion, Public Relations, Publicity, and Personal Selling), Advertising is clearly on the decline. Commercial avoidance continues to get stronger with each measurement period as more of use our DVR, watch Netflix or Amazon Prime or simply have another device going when advertising appears. So, conventional advertising simply is not and cannot work as well as it once did even a decade ago. Something has to pick up the slack among the remaining Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) pillars. While each brand or service will have a different mix of IMC components, I would bet that a surprise gainer in the emerging new reality will be PR.
Why PR? Studies in recent years have clearly illustrated that adults are increasingly getting cynical about advertising. This is especially true of millennials who rely heavily on social media, Amazon reviews, and the opinions of friends before making purchases. PR, executed properly, can help a company. Remember, PR is not a 30 second spot or a print ad. It is a PROCESS by which a company can assess where they stand with any number of their publics--consumers, employees, shareholders, government, the media and their local communities and then take action to repair perceptions. Essentially, it is a long game. A company in the 21st century needs to refine and rebuild its reputation continually. Running and hiding from the press only raises more issues than it solves. Meet with your opponents be they political, press or community groups. Today, we live in a 24/7 world of communication. If you let outside groups know who you are and what explicitly that you stand for, you will likely come out way ahead of what advertising (as we know it) could ever do for you.
Finally, a few words about “spin.” The late presidential speechwriter and wordsmith William Safire defined spin as a “deliberate shading of news perception; attempted control of political reaction.” PR people are often referred to as “spin-doctors” who can put a positive face on anything. Sometimes, they get away with it but it appears to be less so today. True PR pros put the best foot forward of their client but they should never spin. Remember when as a child you were told something to the effect that if you tell a lie you will eventually have to tell 10 more to cover it up? Well, in the business world that is oh so true when it comes to spin. As PR guru Fraser Seitel put it, “The crisis will hurt you, but the cover-up will kill you.” If you always tell the truth, even the painful truth, you never have to keep track of what you have said in the past. Spin is manipulation and people today, especially millennials, do not want to feel as if they are being toyed with or lied to in any way.
So, keep an eye on PR. Perhaps upgrade your PR staff or service provider. It may prove to be inexpensive and effective over the next decade.
If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Well. Having said that, I am convinced that things will change somewhat over the next several years. Of the seven pillars of Integrated Marketing Communications (Advertising, Direct Marketing, Internet Marketing, Promotion, Public Relations, Publicity, and Personal Selling), Advertising is clearly on the decline. Commercial avoidance continues to get stronger with each measurement period as more of use our DVR, watch Netflix or Amazon Prime or simply have another device going when advertising appears. So, conventional advertising simply is not and cannot work as well as it once did even a decade ago. Something has to pick up the slack among the remaining Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) pillars. While each brand or service will have a different mix of IMC components, I would bet that a surprise gainer in the emerging new reality will be PR.
Why PR? Studies in recent years have clearly illustrated that adults are increasingly getting cynical about advertising. This is especially true of millennials who rely heavily on social media, Amazon reviews, and the opinions of friends before making purchases. PR, executed properly, can help a company. Remember, PR is not a 30 second spot or a print ad. It is a PROCESS by which a company can assess where they stand with any number of their publics--consumers, employees, shareholders, government, the media and their local communities and then take action to repair perceptions. Essentially, it is a long game. A company in the 21st century needs to refine and rebuild its reputation continually. Running and hiding from the press only raises more issues than it solves. Meet with your opponents be they political, press or community groups. Today, we live in a 24/7 world of communication. If you let outside groups know who you are and what explicitly that you stand for, you will likely come out way ahead of what advertising (as we know it) could ever do for you.
Finally, a few words about “spin.” The late presidential speechwriter and wordsmith William Safire defined spin as a “deliberate shading of news perception; attempted control of political reaction.” PR people are often referred to as “spin-doctors” who can put a positive face on anything. Sometimes, they get away with it but it appears to be less so today. True PR pros put the best foot forward of their client but they should never spin. Remember when as a child you were told something to the effect that if you tell a lie you will eventually have to tell 10 more to cover it up? Well, in the business world that is oh so true when it comes to spin. As PR guru Fraser Seitel put it, “The crisis will hurt you, but the cover-up will kill you.” If you always tell the truth, even the painful truth, you never have to keep track of what you have said in the past. Spin is manipulation and people today, especially millennials, do not want to feel as if they are being toyed with or lied to in any way.
So, keep an eye on PR. Perhaps upgrade your PR staff or service provider. It may prove to be inexpensive and effective over the next decade.
If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
