Why Can't It Be April Fool's Day Every Year?

I’m not talking about the pranking part. I’m talking about the high levels of entertainment and relevance that marketers will be aiming for (and often achieving) today.

Let’s start with the entertainment factor. There’s an analogy with the Super Bowl here: it’s the one day a year when brands make the kind of TV ads they ought to be making all the time – big, emotive, entertaining.

April Fool’s Day has begun to look the same in social media. It’s the one day a year when brands worry less about ramming home their messages and more about being entertaining.

Of course a brand shouldn’t be clownish every day. And not every brand is a suitable candidate for humour. But for those that are, why can’t we set the bar to ‘funny’ every day? Or at least shoot for funny, then we might at least hit ‘amusing’?

I’ve seen too many briefs that put the word ‘witty’ in the tone of voice box. Let’s be honest – ‘witty’ refers to anything that you can tell is trying to be funny, but actually isn’t.

How about if we tried to be as entertaining every day as we are today?

Now, let’s turn to the relevance question.

Online advertising has always over-indexed on relevance. Sometimes to its detriment – as when a news story about salmonella on a cruise ship triggers ads for cruising holidays.

Nevertheless, relevance remains a key goal for brands. Topicality is a quick way to get some, and it’s easier to be topical in social than almost any other medium.

Hence the orgy of ‘eggcellent’ posts around Easter time and Star Wars-themed posts on May the Fourth.

Yes, if done in a crass way, it’s very crass. But at least topical ads are speaking to something that is going on in people’s lives, rather than just what the brand wants to tell people.

We know that people aren’t very interested in brands. But because we live and breathe our brands, it’s easy to forget that. But what if we started each piece of activity with a firm determination to create communications that are relevant to people’s lives, and not just saying what we want to say?

So I’m looking forward to today’s April Fools. Being rather gullible, I may even be fooled by some of them. But mostly, I’ll just enjoy the fun.

Although, at the risk of taking a slightly heavy tangent for a column about April Fool’s day, there may be a more profound reason for our enjoyment of it.

Apparently, one reason people are so keen to celebrate annual festivals such as Christmas, Easter and April 1st is that they fool us into thinking life is cyclical, rather than the reality of our straight-line journey to the grave.

And there you have it. April 1st – not just a bit of fun, but potentially a template for how brands should behave all year round, and also, deeply comforting on an existential level.

Perhaps not such a trivial day after all.

first published in Mumbrella, 2016

Tony Abbott beats Malcolm Turnbull... on Social Media

Since Malcolm Turnbull took over as Prime Minister on September 15th, the Coalition has jumped 13% in the polls on a two-party preferred basis.

Consumer confidence has leaped 9.2 points, the stock market is up almost 200 points… heck, your garden plants are probably growing better and your kids doing better in school, to judge from the rash of media stories about the ‘Turnbull Effect.’

As you’d expect, the former Goldman Sachs banker is a winner on social media too, with a huge combined audience of 596,257 and an average engagement rate of 4.7%.

He has a higher engagement rate than Hugh Jackman, for Christ’s sake.

(Interestingly enough, the average Australian politician tracked by BrandData has an engagement rate of 2.8%, which is relatively high, and comparable to other high-interest categories such as charity/not for profit, active wear, home/design bloggers, make-up, performing arts, property agents, and sports teams).

But surprisingly, the man in the big house (well, actually his own house) is not the top dog in politics on social media.

In fact, although he took the Prime Ministership off Tony Abbott with the ease of a man picking up the TV remote from a coffee table, he still trails the budgie-smuggling right-winger in terms of online presence. Abbott ranks 2nd, Turnbull 4th.

Indeed Malcolm Turnbull also trails our two other most recent occupants of the Prime Ministerial merry-go-round: Julia Gillard ranks 3rd, and Number 1 is KRudd.

So what is he doing wrong?

His Facebook mixes video and images well, and earns consistent engagement. His YouTube channel is healthy.

It’s really on Twitter – the most crucial channel of the media/political nexus – where he’s lagging.

Turnbull’s follower count of 453,138 is dwarfed by @MrKRudd’s 1.6 million. His engagement is lower too.

Obviously not everyone can be as entertaining as the impish ex-PM, who notoriously tweeted a selfie when he cut himself shaving in 2013.

Perhaps Turnbull needs to inject more glamour into his Social.

Or perhaps not.

At the AFL Grand Final last weekend, our Prime Minister posted about meeting Hollywood actor Liam Hemsworth… only to issue a swift correction when he realised that the Hemsworth he’d been pictured with was actually Chris...

first published in Medium, 2015. Also picked up by the Sydney Morning Herald

Next Year

At around about this time every year, I start making my New Year’s resolutions. This year, seeing as I now seem to have a regular column in Creative Review, I thought I’d share them with you.

Here they are:

Next year I will get more ads made than I did this year

Next year I will not check my e-mail during meetings

Next year I will say thank you to the TV Producer for organising everything and not ask in a loud voice why we are only flying Premium Economy

Next year I will actually visit a company's website and do some proper research on their product before jumping straight in to writing ads about it

Next year I will ask for a pay rise

Next year I will stop reading ad blogs

Next year I will no longer automatically assume that all my ideas are better than my partner’s. (They are, though)

Next year I will ask anyone who briefs me to create a microsite, exactly how they expect consumers to find it. While randomly typing in web addresses, perhaps?

Next year at industry parties I will not drink twice my own bodyweight in booze just because it is free

Next year I will not slag off the brief the minute the planner has left the room

Next year I will not buy my lunch as frequently from Pret A Manger

Next year I will not buy so many pairs of trainers, especially models that are more suited to boxing than the office

Next year I will attend a D&AD Lecture

Next year I will go on facebook no more than twice a day. Or considerably less, should facebook start to become unfashionable

Next year I will write to whoever wins the general election and ask why the UK is so far behind the US in terms of getting the next series of Mad Men

Next year I will turn the pages of Luerzer’s Archive and say ‘scam’… ‘scam’… ‘scam’… ‘scam’, just like I did this year.

Next year I will give jazz another chance. Last one, mind

Next year I will send scripts to new and interesting directors and not just the usual suspects

Next year I will not be distracted by the breasts of my co-workers

Next year I will not be sullen and uncooperative during brainstorms

Next year I will produce an ambient/non-traditional-media piece, rather than just a pile of ideas for ambient/non-traditional-media pieces that never happened

Next year I will sometimes go to a different pub, and not just the one nearest the office

Next year I will not waste time trying to change a creative director’s mind on anything

Next year I either won’t go to any awards ceremonies, or if I do go, I will find a way to feel less murderous

Next year I will get a job at either Fallon, Mother, DDB, BBH or Wieden & Kennedy.

Next year I will make a whole new list of New Year’s resolutions, no doubt.

first published in Creative Review, 2009

The Investment Lesson We Can Learn From Police Cars

Have you ever wondered why the police force buys so many Holdens and Fords?

If you think about it, there must be many other vehicles that are better suited to transporting prisoners, or high-speed pursuits on a Friday night.

But when you buy as many vehicles as the fleet manager of a police force buys, the humble Falcon and Commodore have one great advantage – they’re easy to sell.

There’s a big market for these particular vehicles, and they can be exchanged for a well-known price. They’re not the most exciting of vehicles, but they have the benefit - to put it in financial market terms – of being liquid.

They’re the automotive equivalent of Treasury Bonds or Telstra shares.

However, a more sophisticated investor’s portfolio will probably include some investments that are rather less run-of-the-mill than T-Bonds or T shares, such as unlisted securities, or units in unlisted property funds.

These investments can be hugely attractive. The upside of getting into an on-the-rise tech stock before it goes public, for example, hardly needs to be stated.

But unlisted investments have always had one drawback compared to the listed variety – their liquidity.

You may have found a superb investment but you’ve always had to be aware that if this asset is illiquid, you’re locked-in. If your strategic focus changes and this asset no longer fits your portfolio, or if you find yourself needing to raise funds - and fancy liquidating this asset to provide them – it can be a challenge to find a buyer.

There just aren’t the same opportunities to promote and build awareness of an illiquid asset. Treasury Bonds and Telstra shares have their price advertised in the newspaper every day. And if the newspaper price isn’t current enough for you, you can go online and find out what the price is this very second. And if you wish, buy or sell with a click.

Less liquid assets - such as unlisted property funds or unlisted securities – don’t have the same kind of PR.

And the harder it is to find buyers, the harder it can be to find a good price. The holder of the illiquid asset may end up having to sell it back to the same people they bought it from. If existing co-investors or unit-holders don’t want to buy your holding, then that typically exhausts the options. Yes, there are certain informal pools or networks of investors… but it’s a daunting (or expensive) task to hit them all.

Net result, an asset that may have significant value and upside can end up not selling, or selling for significantly less than its true value, purely because it’s tough to trade.

This problem is just what PrimaryMarkets was developed to solve. Our belief is that valuable unlisted assets should not have to be illiquid. We’ve set up a platform to put these assets on display to a global audience, thus multiplying the opportunities for transactions to take place, and bringing all the well-known benefits associated with market transparency.

In short, we want to give that aftermarket Pontiac Firebird or Mercedes 300SL – a vehicle with strong appeal but to a limited universe of buyers – the same chance to find a happy new home as a Ford Falcon or a Holden Commodore.

It’s not a service that will appeal to the bog-standard fleet car buyer. But to the sophisticated investor looking to buy or sell attractive unlisted assets, it will.

first published on The Switzer Report, 2016

Matt Eastwood's Jacket

Matt Eastwood, worldwide chief creative officer of JWT, has one of the world's biggest creative jobs, and has to be considered one of Australia's global creative leaders not just in advertising, but in any field.

Is it partly due to the way he dresses?

Now don't get me wrong, Mr Eastwood has overseen a ton of great work. A TON. Examples: “Yeah, that kind of rich” for the New York Lottery, and the “Hashtag Killer” campaign for WATERisLIFE.

I really enjoyed this recent podcast in which Eastwood discusses topics as varied as leadership behaviour, and how JWT invented the grilled cheese sandwich.

He's impressive throughout - a solid combo of charm, insight and dedication. 

But because I'm extraordinarily superficial, there was one section in particular that really struck me. It was a part where he described his days as a young creative, and how on deciding that he wanted to become a Creative Director, he changed the way he dressed. He smartened up, and started to wear a jacket.

At first his fellow creatives ribbed him a bit, but after a while they accepted it... and so did the senior Suits, and Clients.

Shortly afterwards, he was promoted to Creative Director. 

Now, I expect I'll get heat for this. Some of the most rabid comments I've ever had on this blog were not triggered by frenzied debates over controversial pieces of work, but came when I dared to suggest that what you wear makes a difference to how you are perceived. 

I guess Creatives are hardcore and want to think "it's all about the work." That's a praiseworthy belief to hold, but there is plenty of evidence showing that your appearance matters too.

So... are you wearing a jacket?

And please note, I mean this as much metaphorically as literally. In other words, I'm suggesting you ask yourself: are you solely focused on coming up with great ideas, or are you also making smart choices about how you progress your career?

first published on Campaign Brief, 2015