Maybe Cook needs to move marketing from Schiller to someone else. Wouldn't hurt to have a fresh leadership there. I don't mind Apple's recent marketing campaigns but a lot of people do feel they lack the excitement of past campaigns.
Based on what non anecdotal evidence? The "Your verse" campaign is great as is the "Powerful" campaign.
Based on what non anecdotal evidence? The "Your verse" campaign is great as is the "Powerful" campaign.
It's not a bad campaign, but it isn't great. It has gotten Apple attention, which has some benefit. I personally find it a bit obscure, however in the overall scheme of things it is not terrible.
I find it interesting that Apple would hire the CEO of Burberry for retail, but they haven't hired Lee Clow or Hal Riney or their equivalent from the world of advertising or marketing to work internally and lead a team at Apple. Why not hire the "best of the best of the best"?
"Apple spent more than $1 billion on advertising last year and is believed to be worth as much as $150 million in yearly revenues for TBWAMAL, which serves no other clients."
Why don't Apple just buy TBWAMAL since Apple is their only client.
It's not a bad campaign, but it isn't great. It has gotten Apple attention, which has some benefit. I personally find it a bit obscure, however in the overall scheme of things it is not terrible.
I find it interesting that Apple would hire the CEO of Burberry for retail, but they haven't hired Lee Clow or Hal Riney or their equivalent from the world of advertising or marketing to work internally and lead a team at Apple. Why not hire the "best of the best of the best"?
...yet. But as they say, some folks rather be the boss rather than an underling.
1000 staff for marketing seems to suggest something else is going on? perhaps expansion into Google stronghold with increased focus on iAd, servicing clients with Ads?
Meanwhile I saw a "Chicken Fat " excise Apple twice yesterday that was all over the place. The song was better than the ad itself. Like what were the aps and why only the 5s at the end? I would think the 5c would be more of a sport device than a 5s which seems more of a business tool.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
Meanwhile I saw a "Chicken Fat " excise Apple twice yesterday that was all over the place. The song was better than the ad itself. Like what were the aps and why only the 5s at the end? I would think the 5c would be more of a sport device than a 5s which seems more of a business tool.
Maybe because the 5c only has an A6. No A7 chip with M7 motion coprocessor.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
I agree; my favorite OSX feature is desktop Spaces, but very few Windows users are aware of that feature and many Mac users also have no idea. I think the reason is that Apple limits feature messages is that they are trying to push the "experiences" aspects, rather than the tech aspects of the products.
But again, I agree. Ben Thompson at Stretechery.com has written a lot about how he feels Apple misses the mark in their iPad marketing and advertising.
It's also surprising that I rarely see MacBook Air and MacBook Pro TV commercials. Considering they'd like to grow this product segment, I'm quite surprised.
It's not a bad campaign, but it isn't great. It has gotten Apple attention, which has some benefit. I personally find it a bit obscure, however in the overall scheme of things it is not terrible.
I find it interesting that Apple would hire the CEO of Burberry for retail, but they haven't hired Lee Clow or Hal Riney or their equivalent from the world of advertising or marketing to work internally and lead a team at Apple. Why not hire the "best of the best of the best"?
Yeah I'm a bit surprises too. Sure Phil has been in the marketing role for a long time. But that wasn't really his background. Heck, according to his Apple bio his degree is in Biology. . I'd love to see Cook bring on some marketing powerhouse and put Apple's marketing resources under them.
Meanwhile I saw a "Chicken Fat " excise Apple twice yesterday that was all over the place. The song was better than the ad itself. Like what were the aps and why only the 5s at the end? I would think the 5c would be more of a sport device than a 5s which seems more of a business tool.
I'd love to know who suggested that Gigantic song for the last iPhone ad. Did they not know the song is about someone's rather large genitals?
To show you how stuff like this can be spun any way you want, here’s the headline from Business Insider...
“Apple Is Trying To Hire 1,000 New Ad Execs — Here's Why Many Of Them Are Saying 'No'"
The article goes on to explain that Google, not Apple, is the preferred brand these days so no self-respecting ad executive wants to join Apple. They want to be on a winning team.
To show you how stuff like this can be spun any way you want, here’s the headline from Business Insider...
“Apple Is Trying To Hire 1,000 New Ad Execs — Here's Why Many Of Them Are Saying 'No'"
The article goes on to explain that Google, not Apple, is the preferred brand these days so no self-respecting ad executive wants to join Apple. They want to be on a winning team.
Wow! what a spin.
BusinessInsider is as horrible as HuffingtonPost as far as click bait goes. They are the TMZ of business reportage.
This may be about reducing costs but there is a potential downside. An effective external agency will challenge your perceptions of your own products. An internal agency is much more likely to rehash old themes.
Exactly. Outside consultants don't see the same scenery internal employees do.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
The purpose of advertising is not to "inform" as much as it is to "position." The product is cleverly/craftily positioned with desirable other items, elements, activities, subjects, etc. to make it seem more attractive, desirable, etc. Any enlightenment about the product's features should happen at the store after the person has been lured there by the ad, and when they are in the best possible position to actually buy it.
That's why he earns the big bucks,. I've always held that shaking up an ad agency by threatening and instituting changes that may decrease their income will make them work harder and do better than otherwise. A vendor should never feel too fat and comfortable.
Apple gains another advantage in the in-house move and that is advertising can be plugged into the new product's story earlier without involving an outside company. This way the release of a new product can be supported by advertising from day one and Apple will be able to "tell their story from the get-go" and not leave it up to analysts to tell it in their own cockameme way.
Comments
Based on what non anecdotal evidence? The "Your verse" campaign is great as is the "Powerful" campaign.
Based on what non anecdotal evidence? The "Your verse" campaign is great as is the "Powerful" campaign.
It's not a bad campaign, but it isn't great. It has gotten Apple attention, which has some benefit. I personally find it a bit obscure, however in the overall scheme of things it is not terrible.
I find it interesting that Apple would hire the CEO of Burberry for retail, but they haven't hired Lee Clow or Hal Riney or their equivalent from the world of advertising or marketing to work internally and lead a team at Apple. Why not hire the "best of the best of the best"?
"Apple spent more than $1 billion on advertising last year and is believed to be worth as much as $150 million in yearly revenues for TBWAMAL, which serves no other clients."
Why don't Apple just buy TBWAMAL since Apple is their only client.
...yet. But as they say, some folks rather be the boss rather than an underling.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
... in part by a need to be more agile and roll out creative more quickly.
And more secretly. You know, the doubling down thing.
Meanwhile I saw a "Chicken Fat " excise Apple twice yesterday that was all over the place. The song was better than the ad itself. Like what were the aps and why only the 5s at the end? I would think the 5c would be more of a sport device than a 5s which seems more of a business tool.
Maybe because the 5c only has an A6. No A7 chip with M7 motion coprocessor.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
I agree; my favorite OSX feature is desktop Spaces, but very few Windows users are aware of that feature and many Mac users also have no idea. I think the reason is that Apple limits feature messages is that they are trying to push the "experiences" aspects, rather than the tech aspects of the products.
But again, I agree. Ben Thompson at Stretechery.com has written a lot about how he feels Apple misses the mark in their iPad marketing and advertising.
It's also surprising that I rarely see MacBook Air and MacBook Pro TV commercials. Considering they'd like to grow this product segment, I'm quite surprised.
...yet. But as they say, some folks rather be the boss rather than an underling.
This is true, but as we've seen with Jimmy Iovine and Angela Ahrendts, a metric ton of money has a way of changing minds.
To show you how stuff like this can be spun any way you want, here’s the headline from Business Insider...
“Apple Is Trying To Hire 1,000 New Ad Execs — Here's Why Many Of Them Are Saying 'No'"
The article goes on to explain that Google, not Apple, is the preferred brand these days so no self-respecting ad executive wants to join Apple. They want to be on a winning team.
Wow! what a spin.
To show you how stuff like this can be spun any way you want, here’s the headline from Business Insider...
“Apple Is Trying To Hire 1,000 New Ad Execs — Here's Why Many Of Them Are Saying 'No'"
The article goes on to explain that Google, not Apple, is the preferred brand these days so no self-respecting ad executive wants to join Apple. They want to be on a winning team.
Wow! what a spin.
BusinessInsider is as horrible as HuffingtonPost as far as click bait goes. They are the TMZ of business reportage.
This may be about reducing costs but there is a potential downside. An effective external agency will challenge your perceptions of your own products. An internal agency is much more likely to rehash old themes.
Exactly. Outside consultants don't see the same scenery internal employees do.
Exactly. Outside consultants don't see the same scenery internal employees do.
[/QUOTE]
Plus if they don't do a great job, they get fired and the whole agency feels it.
I have no doubt that Apple can produce better, more informative ads. They have the technology in house - maybe even the people. What I personally would like to see is snippets what the products can do. Often I watch an ad (not necessarily an Apple ad) and I say to my wife: What are they trying to sell or say ? When I show people what my Fall 2010 MacBook Air is capable of doing, they often say I did not know an Apple could do that.
Apple Products and software have some amazing features and capabilities, but we hardly see anything on TV about these features. Having an engineering degree and a business degree I may have a different perspective than others. This is not necessarily better by any means. I am sure it takes a long time to produce an ad from inception to finish and I believe this can be reduced by an Apple in-house team.
The purpose of advertising is not to "inform" as much as it is to "position." The product is cleverly/craftily positioned with desirable other items, elements, activities, subjects, etc. to make it seem more attractive, desirable, etc. Any enlightenment about the product's features should happen at the store after the person has been lured there by the ad, and when they are in the best possible position to actually buy it.
That's why he earns the big bucks,. I've always held that shaking up an ad agency by threatening and instituting changes that may decrease their income will make them work harder and do better than otherwise. A vendor should never feel too fat and comfortable.
Apple gains another advantage in the in-house move and that is advertising can be plugged into the new product's story earlier without involving an outside company. This way the release of a new product can be supported by advertising from day one and Apple will be able to "tell their story from the get-go" and not leave it up to analysts to tell it in their own cockameme way.