Apple not taking chances with ads, is too 'vanilla' says former ad director

Posted:
in iPhone edited July 2018
Ken Segall, who was creative director at Chiat/Day and worked on "Think Different" and other notable Apple campaigns, questions the company's branding and advertising, and is accusing the present creative team of giving Tim Cook "vanilla" advice.

Ken Segall with Steve Jobs and others


Speaking in an interview with The Daily Telegraph, as cited by Business Insider, Segall argues that Apple today is missing that aura that Steve Jobs created, which made customers "lust" for the company's products.

"The passing of Steve Jobs created a completely different approach to marketing which we can see the results of," Segall said. "As a marketer, I look at that and can see the difference between Steve being there -- and not being there -- very clearly."

"These days, Apple does a different campaign for a different phone, which I always thought was a lost opportunity," Segall told the newspaper. "They should be building a personality for the phone, a thing that people might want to be part of because it rises above the features of the moment." He went on to argue that Tim Cook is operating with the advice of those around him, who are "a little vanilla."

About Segall

Segall is now an author and speaker, one whose past work with Apple on a hugely successful series of campaigns is clearly a huge part of his public-facing identity. His Twitter bio describes him as "former Apple ad guy. Speaker, blogger, creative consultant."

It's not surprising that someone who was present for and a part of Steve Jobs' return and rise in the late 1990s would idealize and celebrate that particular time in the company's history, and all of the success that it brought.





But the truth is, whatever Tim Cook is doing, marketing-wise, it's working. Apple is more profitable, sells more iPhones on a quarterly basis, and is valued much more highly under him than it ever was when Steve Jobs was alive and in charge of the company.

In 2002, the year the Think Different campaign wrapped up, Apple posted a first quarter profit of $38 million on $1.38 billion of revenue and shipped 746,000 Macs. In the first quarter of 2018, Apple posted a profit of just over $20 billion, on revenue of $88.3 billion and sold 5.1 million Macs.

Yes, the company's marketing and advertising strategy today is certainly different than it was back in the late 1990s. But why would Apple keep using a 1990s strategy forever? Tim Cook and his team have marketed the company's products the way products are marketed in this decade- and they've had phenomenal success in doing so. You could almost say they thought different.

"Brilliant people are there"

Ironically, Segall had positive things to say about Apple's present direction just a couple of weeks ago.

Speaking to the Korea Chamber of Commerce on July 18 in Seogwipo, South Korea, Segall talked about his work with Jobs and the late CEO's legacy within Apple today.

"Steve was quite unique and will never ever be replaced, so it is impossible for Apple to be the same," Segall told the Chamber. "But I think his value is there, and brilliant people are there, so things move forward. I think the innovation is happening in a same pace, really."

Two CEOs, two strategies

Tim Cook and Steve Jobs are two very different men with two very different strategic and leadership styles and two very different ideas of how to best run Apple, and that includes the company's advertising and marketing efforts.

History will likely show that each of them was the best man to have run the company at the particular time that they did. And while Steve Jobs' legacy will likely always be a part of what Apple is, Tim Cook clearly begun to chart a path of his own.

Doing things differently from the way Jobs doesn't necessarily mean doing them wrong.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    andrewj5790StrangeDaysmacxpressd_2tmaymike1nicedaytoyallradarthekatpscooter63williamlondon
  • Reply 2 of 46
    Eric_WVGGEric_WVGG Posts: 973member
    Apple should have gotten sued like mad over the Think Different campaign.

    It would be illegal for a company to make commercials featuring Tom Cruise without first reaching an agreement with him. It's illegal to use the likenesses of Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe without reaching an agreement with their estates. Someone tried to cop on the Beastie Boys recently and the surviving members went nuts. 

    Doesn't matter if they're "paying tribute" — featuring John Lennon and Martin Luther King in an advertisement is weird and creepy. The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.

    That said… the only truly great ad they've made in years was the Spike Jones HomePod bit.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 46
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    We’ve all noticed the difference, Ken. Apple is less innovative and unpredictable, but more profitable.
    tyler82[Deleted User]anantksundaramvirgilisleading42pscooter63jony0
  • Reply 4 of 46
    backstabbackstab Posts: 138member
    I don't know that SJ needed to be brought into the this conversation. It's always easy to contrast any aspect of apple BS / AS (Before After Steve)
    It's enough just to say Apple's advertising campaigns are considerably less interesting and inventive as of late.
    For myself, the last thing (that I can remember) that I really thought was great, was the "Shot on iPhone" campaign.
  • Reply 5 of 46
    Eric_WVGG said:
    Apple should have gotten sued like mad over the Think Different campaign.

    It would be illegal for a company to make commercials featuring Tom Cruise without first reaching an agreement with him. It's illegal to use the likenesses of Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe without reaching an agreement with their estates. Someone tried to cop on the Beastie Boys recently and the surviving members went nuts. 

    Doesn't matter if they're "paying tribute" — featuring John Lennon and Martin Luther King in an advertisement is weird and creepy. The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.

    That said… the only truly great ad they've made in years was the Spike Jones HomePod bit.
    Untrue. Misunderstood was great. The Frankenstein’s monster as was great as well. Memorable. 
    pscooter63
  • Reply 6 of 46
    We’ve all noticed the difference, Ken. Apple is less innovative and unpredictable, but more profitable.
    Less innovative by what measure? It’s a “feeling” not a fact. And feelings are notoriously counter-factual. 
    StrangeDaysrogifan_newjony0
  • Reply 7 of 46
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    lkrupp said:
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    Why do you discount their expertise. Either Apple's latest advertising is vanilla or it isn't. I think it is 
    [Deleted User]anantksundaramcat52williamlondon
  • Reply 8 of 46
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Not sure Apple needs a bold ad campaign at this stag of the game. But I have to agree, Apple ads are not note worth and talked about anymore that is for sure.

    As I said before, the If you did not know better (and most consumer fall into this space) the Samsung ads are making the iPhone and Apple solution look like crap. If you listen to Samsung it is better to get new hardware every year to get new hardware and software features why wait for software updated from Apple. Samsung turned a google android negative into a positive. Samsung is the master of all publicity is good publicity. Anytime something happen negative with Apple they freak out. 
  • Reply 9 of 46
    hammeroftruthhammeroftruth Posts: 1,354member
    lkrupp said:
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    He didn't say Apple was failing. He said they weren't taking chances. Although during the time he was involved, Apple was "beleaguered", so they had to. 

    I believe that his message is Apple isn't as hungry as they used to be, and they aren't.

    Profits are more of a priority now. 

    Take it as a warning. Don't rest on your laurels or you can end up like, well Microsoft. 
    designranantksundaram
  • Reply 10 of 46
    hammeroftruthhammeroftruth Posts: 1,354member
    Eric_WVGG said:
    Apple should have gotten sued like mad over the Think Different campaign.

    It would be illegal for a company to make commercials featuring Tom Cruise without first reaching an agreement with him. It's illegal to use the likenesses of Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe without reaching an agreement with their estates. Someone tried to cop on the Beastie Boys recently and the surviving members went nuts. 

    Doesn't matter if they're "paying tribute" — featuring John Lennon and Martin Luther King in an advertisement is weird and creepy. The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.

    That said… the only truly great ad they've made in years was the Spike Jones HomePod bit.
    Except Apple did get permission. 
    mknelsonanantksundaramtmaymike1grifmxRayz2016asdasdpscooter63uraharajony0
  • Reply 11 of 46
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 13,101member
    Eric_WVGG said:
    Apple should have gotten sued like mad over the Think Different campaign.

    It would be illegal for a company to make commercials featuring Tom Cruise without first reaching an agreement with him. It's illegal to use the likenesses of Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe without reaching an agreement with their estates. Someone tried to cop on the Beastie Boys recently and the surviving members went nuts. 

    Doesn't matter if they're "paying tribute" — featuring John Lennon and Martin Luther King in an advertisement is weird and creepy. The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.
    This is insanity. It was a great ad, and it didn't confirm anything of the sort, nor are they combatting that image twenty years later. Normals have no idea of the "But Apple is arrogant!" troll trope. It's all in your head.
    radarthekaturahara
  • Reply 12 of 46
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 13,101member

    asdasd said:
    lkrupp said:
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    Why do you discount their expertise. Either Apple's latest advertising is vanilla or it isn't. I think it is 
    Patently false. It's a subjective topic based on feeling and preferences (akin to "Chocolate ice cream is better"), and you're trying to pass it off as a quantitative fact.
    lkrupppscooter63mike1
  • Reply 13 of 46
    FFS folks, the guy was giving an answer in an interview and gave his personal view on how something he was involved in years ago is clearly different nowadays. No need to get the pitchforks out (that goes to AI staff too, taking needless digs in the article). It's clear to anyone that Apple has changed over the years which is expected, it's no longer the small guy fighting to be noticed, it's the big player looking to stay on top. You don't (and can't) run a 2-person start-up like a medium-size business nor that like a national or international chain and vice-versa, common sense. It's his personal opinion that he preferred the jobs-era Apple.
  • Reply 14 of 46
    Eric_WVGGEric_WVGG Posts: 973member
    ...
    Except Apple did get permission. 
    Damn. I did not know that. “Jobs pulled some strings to get usage rights from celebrities including Joan Baez (Jobs’ ex-girlfriend) and Yoko Ono (once a neighbour). If Clow had approached these people, he would be another adman. When Jobs called, he was a friend.” Alright, I redact some of that. I still think it comes off as creepy and arrogant, but glad to hear that.
    Eric_WVGG said:
    The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.
    This is insanity. It was a great ad, and it didn't confirm anything of the sort, nor are they combatting that image twenty years later. Normals have no idea of the "But Apple is arrogant!" troll trope. It's all in your head.
    Even Steve knew. “This is great, this is really great … but I can’t do this. People already think I’m an egotist, and putting the Apple logo up there with all these geniuses will get me skewered by the press.”
    king editor the grategatorguy
  • Reply 15 of 46
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 13,101member
    lkrupp said:
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    He didn't say Apple was failing. He said they weren't taking chances. Although during the time he was involved, Apple was "beleaguered", so they had to. 

    I believe that his message is Apple isn't as hungry as they used to be, and they aren't.

    Profits are more of a priority now. 

    Take it as a warning. Don't rest on your laurels or you can end up like, well Microsoft. 
    Actually he did imply they're failing, by suggesting consumers don't lust after their products, wanting them and purchasing them:

    "Segall argues that Apple today is missing that aura that Steve Jobs created, which made customers 'lust' for the company's products."

    ..that's a clear claim. No lust = lower sales = failing. Yet, it's quantitatively false, based on sales data.

    Profits are more of a priority now. 

    People used to complain that Apple was failing in the '90s. Now that Apple has pivoted from its *actual* failing and is killing it with successful products that deliver value to happy customers, people complain that they're too focused on profits. Classic moving of the goalposts. 
    edited July 2018 pscooter63mike1
  • Reply 16 of 46
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,928administrator
    adm1 said:
    FFS folks, the guy was giving an answer in an interview and gave his personal view on how something he was involved in years ago is clearly different nowadays. No need to get the pitchforks out (that goes to AI staff too, taking needless digs in the article). It's clear to anyone that Apple has changed over the years which is expected, it's no longer the small guy fighting to be noticed, it's the big player looking to stay on top. You don't (and can't) run a 2-person start-up like a medium-size business nor that like a national or international chain and vice-versa, common sense. It's his personal opinion that he preferred the jobs-era Apple.
    When we get our pitchforks out, you'll know it and it will be super-clear.

    This is not that. This is just context.
    edited July 2018 king editor the gratepscooter63
  • Reply 17 of 46
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 13,101member
    Eric_WVGG said:
    ...
    Except Apple did get permission. 
    Damn. I did not know that. “Jobs pulled some strings to get usage rights from celebrities including Joan Baez (Jobs’ ex-girlfriend) and Yoko Ono (once a neighbour). If Clow had approached these people, he would be another adman. When Jobs called, he was a friend.” Alright, I redact some of that. I still think it comes off as creepy and arrogant, but glad to hear that.
    Eric_WVGG said:
    The campaign confirmed many anti-Apple biases of the company being conceited and hollow. Twenty years later, they're still combatting that image.
    This is insanity. It was a great ad, and it didn't confirm anything of the sort, nor are they combatting that image twenty years later. Normals have no idea of the "But Apple is arrogant!" troll trope. It's all in your head.
    Even Steve knew. “This is great, this is really great … but I can’t do this. People already think I’m an egotist, and putting the Apple logo up there with all these geniuses will get me skewered by the press.”
    Which has nothing to do with what you claimed -- that the ad cemented Apple as arrogant, did damage to their reputation, and that they're still repairing it today. Again, outside of techie forums, no one would have any idea what you're talking about.
    edited July 2018 lkrupppscooter63radarthekat
  • Reply 18 of 46
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,312member
    "Steve was quite unique and will never ever be replaced, so it is impossible for Apple to be the same,"

    Something is either unique or it isn’t. No adjectives or other descriptors should ever be paired with that word. Rant over. 
  • Reply 19 of 46
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,297member
    lkrupp said:
    Why do we always hear from former employees and contractors about how Apple is now failing under Cook? We already got Woz trashing the company from time to time. We got the “If Steve were alive” crowd pounding away, even though many of them called Jobs the supreme asshole of the universe when he was alive. We got the disgruntled headless Mac luddites clamoring for integrated optical disc drives and RS-232 ports (okay, overkill on the sarcasm but you get it). We got the notch haters, the keyboard haters, the bezel haters, we got the troll army in the trenches.

    Yet Apple under Tim Cook keeps chugging along, keeps being profitable, keeps selling products most people like, keeps rewarding shareholders, keeps competitors nervous at all times (look no further than the recent Samsung “ads”). 
    He didn't say Apple was failing. He said they weren't taking chances. Although during the time he was involved, Apple was "beleaguered", so they had to. 

    I believe that his message is Apple isn't as hungry as they used to be, and they aren't.

    Profits are more of a priority now. 

    Take it as a warning. Don't rest on your laurels or you can end up like, well Microsoft. 
    And many people here constantly point out this fact as if nothing matters so long as Apple makes the most profits. I had family in town the past week and several family members complained about their Apple devices. They complained about constant software changes and battery issues with iPhone. My 21 year old nephew even said he wanted to get an Android. Most likely they won’t leave Apple. Why? Because getting a new phone and changing platforms can be a pain in the ass. I don’t know of anyone who looks forward to buying a new phone. So they’ll stick with Apple for now even though they don’t love it because they don’t have the time or energy to deal with switching. This is just anecdotal of course but I think it’s instructive. Of course it’s not so great in Android land but I think Apple should have higher aspirations than just being better than Android.
    hammeroftruthmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 20 of 46
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,411member
    I couldn't agree more with this guy.

    'Vanilla' is being charitable.
    hammeroftruthcat52muthuk_vanalingamSpamSandwichwilliamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.