Take It Face To Face

For those of you who have been following my posts on FaceTime’s site, you’ll probably have noticed the trend. Aspiring food critic that I am, if I can find a way to talk about the food industry, I will. (Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D). Because it bears only minor relevance to my actual job, I imagine that pretty soon I’ll be banned from the subject altogether.

But even if it had come to that already, there’s no way I could nor would ever bypass the opportunity I’ve just been presented.  This time there’s an incentive wrapped up in it, beyond simply telling you fine people my opinion (not that I don’t enjoy that too).

Check this out: Dairy Queen announced on Wednesday, via its blog, a number of interesting things. In addition to filling in consumers in on the details of their new value menu, they made bloggers (and that means me!) a pretty sweet offer.

The first 250 bloggers to write a public post entailing “what sweet deal you’d make with [DQ] to try [their] Sweet Deals for free” will get a $5 gift certificate to Dairy Queen. Now, in my never ending quest for free food, this is a pretty exciting thing. The cherry on top of it all (Ah! Sorry. I try to stop the puns but they just keep coming) is that the author of the best and most creative blog post earns weekly free food for a year. Wow, I suddenly wish that I was better at thinking under pressure.

Now here I am typing away furiously, with the knowledge that two days have elapsed since this information went public and I probably have an icecream cone’s chance in…whatever that this quota hasn’t been fulfilled yet.

What brought me to this link in the first place was actually a poll on PR Week’s website asking visitors whether they thought that this campaign was brilliant or simply shameless. Good question.

By virtue of the fact that I’m participating, I think you have my answer. The cost-effectiveness of this idea in comparison with its potential reach? So worthwhile.

In the ever-growing good/evil dichotomy of restaurants presented in my posts, Dairy Queen goes, without question, on the side with Denny’s, Z-Burger and other generally awesome venues when it comes to their marketing successes. And in truth, they’re not exactly buying my accolades here, just assurance that I’ll mention them at all.

So here’s where honesty sets in: I can’t remember the last time I ate at a Dairy Queen. Must’ve been more than a decade. I must also admit that I find it kind of bizarre that the place serves hamburgers and fries. I think they should probably go back and have a long, hard look at their mission statement. But that’s a discussion for another time.

Back to the issue at hand: What sweet deal would I, Abby Horowitz, make with Dairy Queen to try their Sweet Deals for free? Would I shave my head? Mmm. No. Would I tattoo my person? Absolutely not. Name my first two children Dairy and Queen? Maybe.

Think, think, think.

Got it.

For the opportunity to try Dairy Queen’s Sweet Deals for free, I would drop all the important things I’m doing at work; I would, by doing so, put my job on the line (this is an exaggeration, but go with it for dramatic effect); I would risk eliciting a frosty, disproving stare from my boss (also not terribly likely, but still possible); Simultaneously, I would write Dairy Queen a blog post. It doesn’t sound like much, I know, but my future children sure appreciate it.

Earlier this month, I wrote a blog post discussing the merit of free food giveaways at restaurants. At the time, I concluded that these promotions, though initially costly for the venue, are ultimately beneficial because of the positive publicity they invite.

Though I still agree with this statement, I’d like to issue an addendum. A word to the restaurateur considering this sort of campaign: if you say you’re going to give something away, you actually have to do it.

Spotlight on Quiznos, whose reputation (in the eyes of at least six people I know) has just gone completely down the drain.

Earlier this week, the nationwide sub franchise began the Million Sub Giveaway, a campaign that is deceptive both in name and concept. Those interested in the deal were asked to sign up through Quiznos website, and soon after received a personalized coupon by email.

The trouble started when it came time for redeeming these coupons. During my visit, the woman behind the counter informed us, with no further explanation, that her location would not be accepting the coupons. All five people waiting in line (most of who had been planning on spending money) promptly left the store.

One holdout location would be a minor frustration, surely, but this was only the tip of the iceberg. A pair of my friends, eager to redeem their coupons, visited two more locations in Washington, DC only to be turned away yet again.

One store expressed the sentiment that they would no longer make good on their promise of a free sub because felt they had given away too many. Yes. 1,000,000 is a lot. Wasn’t that kind of the idea?

The fine print on the coupon, to be expected, states that it is, “valid only at participating locations.” Well fine, what might those locations be? When IHOP gave away a free short stack this week, its website clearly indicated the small number of locations nationwide at which the offer did not apply.

Remembering this, I scoured the Quiznos website for some indicator. None. I sent an email inquiry. No response.

Today, the counter on Quiznos website proudly reads, “WE’VE REACHED 1 MILLION!” If by 1 million, they’re referring to 1 million useless coupons, then yes, I suppose they have. I would be interested to see figures on how many coupons were actually redeemed, but I’m sure I never will.

It pains me to think of all the good publicity Quiznos received by virtue of this deception. But at the same time, I’m sure public opinion will align more with the company’s actions than with its words. My friend Lindsay summed up the impact of this campaign rather well when she said, “I was completely indifferent to [Quiznos] before, but now I actively hate them.”

Were you able to redeem your coupon? Anyone? Anyone at all? Do you think Quiznos’ public image was improved or damaged by this campaign?

Topless Coffee Spills

So on the way into the office this morning I was (sitting on the Chain Bridge behind a few people who decided to play bumper tag) listening to WTOP when I hear about about a coffee shop in Maine.  The only thing differing it from other coffee shops is the fact that the staff is topless (men and women.)  Which, is also the only reason it’s received the press it has, and here I am furthering the cycle.

But, the GrandView Topless Coffee Shop’s opening, regardless of how you feel about it, brings up an interesting point which has been discussed among marketers ad infinitum - does shock sell? Obviously nothing stirs up some good quick press like shock or controversy.  But is that initial splash a way to lead into a long term sales and marketing strategy, or is it just what it is, some shock and entertainment value for a few days before dropping back into obscurity?

There are no shortage of companies that use shock to sell, from Axe Body Spray to Tom Ford cologne even Ikea, PETA, GoDaddy and countless others.  Several companies use the shock value to bolster attention and awareness of a new product and offering, and as the uproar dies down they have one of three general options:

1. Segue into a secondary campaign that continues to capitalize on the awareness generated by the initial shock.

2. Ride that sweet publicity wave as far as it will take you and hope the sales follow.

3. Attempt to top your last ad by doing another, even more shocking ad and repeat this wave of shock as often as possible, pumping as much product out through each publicity peak as humanly possible.

New Coffee Shop Makes a Splash

Different companies will take different routes and approaches, and which one will work best for you really depends on your business.  What method are you a fan of? Care to share any examples of a shock campaign gone right, or maybe one gone wrong?

Bonus: Puns I didn’t use - “They offer sizes A through D,” “Caffeine isn’t the only stimulant they serve,” “The staff is just as hot as the coffee,” And of course there some other gems relating to bean grinding, dairy creamer, and frequent customer discounts.

Did I miss any?

I was watching TV last night and the commercial came on for the incredible edible egg. My first reaction was huh? Why are you advertising eggs? Not even a particular brand of eggs, just eggs themselves.

When I came into work today, my colleague and I were talking about this new campaign and started discussing breadbasket items; items that you need and have to buy; items that sell themselves, like eggs.

Now, I understand a particular brand advertising itself to gain an advantage over its competitors, like Choosing Silk over Horizon milk. But what is the point of just advertising Milk? Or Eggs? We know we need it, no need to sell us on that.

The famous Got Milk? Campaign, although entertaining, did not increase the sales of milk. So, why create the incredible edible egg campaign when past experiences with a breadbasket item proved unsuccessful?

What do you think? Will the egg campaign be successful?

I have a bone to pick.

From across a crowded Metro car this morning, an advertisement caught my eye. It contained no photos, only large, bold copy that read “13 items for a dollar.” Oooh. Who wouldn’t want to pay a dollar and get 13 items? That’s…less than 8 cents apiece. What is this fabulous bargain?

The Metro stopped. The crowd shifted. And…oh please. It’s a McDonald’s ad. Wasn’t the embarrassing outcome of the McLibel lawsuit enough to discourage this sort of behavior? Won’t these people ever learn?

Now, in case you were unsure, McDonald’s does not sell any items for 8 cents a piece. This advertisement is, presumably, a reference to the fast food chain’s dollar menu. It is also, in my humble opinion, an intentionally deceptive ploy to snag undeserved attention.

Seeing this, I was reminded immediately of a “fact” I read in the aptly titled “The Book of Useless Information” by Noel Botham. The statistic, rather ironically, read: “Seven percent of Americans eat McDonald’s every day.”

Now wait a minute. Does Botham mean to say that 7% of Americans are so McDonald’s-crazy that they eat there 365 days a year? Or do American McDonald’s restaurants receive visitors each day equivalent in number to 7% of the U.S. population? I’m still not entirely sure.

In both cases, the author of the statement can no doubt assert that he or she was reciting data. But when concrete facts are phrased in such a way that makes them open to interpretation, they’re no longer facts, as far as I’m concerned.

Now I want to make it clear that what follows is purely fictional, a speculation undoubtedly fueled by my overwhelmingly negative feelings towards McDonalds as a corporation*. But I imagine the conversation that lead to the creation of this ad may have gone something like this:

Exec 1: How can we convince people to come buy McDonald’s food in this economy?
Exec 2: Let’s emphasize our dollar menu.
Exec 1: But that’s not unique. Wendy’s and Burger King both have value menus.
Exec 2: But theirs only have 8 or 9 items. Ours has 13!
Exec 1: No, actually. Ours has 8…
Exec 2: Well let’s just say it has 13. We can put tiny little print after the price so that it reads “A DOLLAR or a little bit more.” Then it’s technically true!

And that is precisely what they did. False advertising or smart advertising? Tell us your thoughts.

*I have Eric Schlosser’s “Fast Food Nation” to thank for much of this. Though it arguably does a bit of the aforementioned fact bending itself, it’s an incredible read if you have the time.