Archive for March, 2007

Just moved. No Internet.

I just moved, so I don’t have Internet today. I should be back online tomorrow. So how did I make this post? That’s’ the magic of having a friend with a Verizon Wireless card.

Sex sells part 2. Or does it?

I asked for a few opinons on my Sex Sells. It even sells modesty post, and the people have spoken. In a couple of cases this kind of strategy actually lost business for a company. Others found it spot on. Read below.

“That billboard gets on my nerves every time I drive by. While it’s clever – cover your assets – it bothers me that they have a mixed message. If all you’re wearing is their shirt, it’s no longer modest. I believe it will get more attention but is that worth alienating their target audience?” – Janet Meiners

“Sex does sell. You sell products, and you sell yourself (morally). Anytime somebody stoops that low they lose my business. Granted, I’m not in the target market for this clothing, but I stopped going to Carls Jr. when they used the racy Paris Hilton commercial, and likewise don’t support other companies that have such uncreative and morally shallow marketing agencies to promote their products.” – Connor Boyack

“I’ve wondered about the effectiveness of this billboard too. It doesn’t seem to speak to the target audience. (Maybe they’re targeting teenagers whose parents require them to be modest, but who don’t really want to — they can be modest and edgy?)

Like Connor’s Carl’s Jr. boycott, I don’t use Godaddy because of their ads.” – Richard Miller

“Here were my thoughts. My sister would love those. My daughter would love those. I didn’t see it as a ‘sexy’ ad … I was thinking more along the lines of ‘you have to start somewhere (naked) when you are getting dressed in the morning’… ” – Jason Alba

“Unfortunately, it plays on an inherent aspect of human nature. We never want to cross the line – but we don’t mind getting as close to it as we can once in a while.” – Rand Bateman

Thanks to all of you who responded.

Sex sells. It even sells modesty.

My wife pointed out a billboard yesterday that uses sex to sell modesty. The billboard was for a company that sells “modest t-shirts” for women, and I think my wife pointed out some justifiably inconsitent messages in said billboard.

My Wife’s Thoughts in my words
- The company tagline is “Cover Your Assets”
- The company name didn’t even fit with a “modest” theme.
- The girl on the billboard looks naked on the lower half and is using her extra long T-shirt to pull the material over her “assests.”
- They’re using sex to sell modesty.

My Thoughts on Undertease
My initial thought is that this company wants to position itself as sexy clothing that isn’t revealing. That being said, I think they accomplish that mission very well. I wonder though how many girls have the same impression as my wife because she is part of the actual purchasing audience that buys “modest t-shirts.”

Your thoughts?
I’m curious to find out what the readers think about a company like that appears to be using “sexy” to sell “modesty.” Is this muddying the branding waters? Is it spot on? I have my opinions, but I’d like to hear your thoughts please . . .

Apx Alarm: An Example of Keyword Research

Keyword research is an interesting ball of wax. Sometimes you find that customers are looking for your products with the exact phrases that you think they are. Other times you find that keywords are completely different. As an example, I did some quick research for a hypothetical pay-per-click campaign (PPC) for Apx Alarm.

The following shows information on keyword searches, number of searches found in WordTracker, Overture and the date that the keywords were pulled.

1 12.02.2008 alarm apex security solution 1 39 0 – –
2 12.02.2008 apex alarm 1 255 14 – –
3 12.02.2008 alarm apx 2 154 0 – –
4 12.02.2008 apex security alarm 2 0 0 – –
5 12.02.2008 apx 2 610 16 – –
6 12.02.2008 apx security 2 0 2 – –
7 12.02.2008 apx alarms 2 0 5 – –
8 12.02.2008 alarm apx security 3 30 0 – –
9 12.02.2008 account apx customer login password 4 38 0 – –
10 12.02.2008 alarm apx system 4 31 0 – –
11 12.02.2008 apex security alarm system 4 59 0 – –
12 12.02.2008 alarm apx system 5 31 0 – –
13 15.02.2008 homesecurity system 6 0 0 – –
14 18.02.2008 web home security system 6 0 0 – –
15 12.02.2008 apex alarm panel 7 0 0 – –
16 15.02.2008 home security system 7 23425 357 – –
17 12.02.2008 alarm apex system 8 116 0 – –
18 12.02.2008 apex alarm systems 8 0 0 – –
19 12.02.2008 apex home security 8 87 0 – –
20 12.02.2008 apex home security systems 8 0 3 – –
21 12.02.2008 apex security systems 9 0 16 – –
22 12.02.2008 apex security system 9 87 5 – –
23 12.02.2008 apex home security system 9 28 0 – –
24 12.02.2008 apex alarm llc 11 0 0 – –
25 15.02.2008 home securty system 11 58 0 – –
26 12.02.2008 apex alarm system 12 39 0 – –
27 15.02.2008 home in security system 12 61 0 – –
28 15.02.2008 home securety system 13 0 0 – –
29 15.02.2008 home security system part 13 102 2 – –
30 15.02.2008 home securtiy system 14 31 0 – –
31 14.02.2008 data entry manager 15 0 0 – –
32 15.02.2008 home sercurity system 15 0 0 – –
33 17.02.2008 security home system 15 0 0 – –
34 17.02.2008 search home security system 16 147 0 – –
35 18.02.2008 who are home security systems 16 0 0 – –
36 12.02.2008 apex alarm utah 17 46 0 – –
37 13.02.2008 company home security system 18 114 0 – –
38 15.02.2008 home security sercurity systems 18 0 2 – –
39 15.02.2008 home alarm security systems http 19 0 3 – –
40 15.02.2008 home security systems 19 0 876 – –
41 15.02.2008 home security systems alarms 19 0 0 – –
42 15.02.2008 home security alarms retail 19 0 0 – –
43 15.02.2008 home secuirty systems 20 0 0 – –

UDOT pulls a Donald Trump. Ya Fired.

You’re fired!

KSL says a UDOT snowplow driver launched ice and slush off a highway overpass that damaged 20 cars. The driver resigned saying he wasn’t “properly trained,” and I’m sure he resigned because it was the right thing to do . . . um no. UDOT spokesman Nile Easton tells KSL the guy would have been canned anyway.

From a PR Perspective . . .
My gut says this guy was told he could resign or be fired. If he resigns, he doesn’t have to say he was fired at his next job, and it makes UDOT look like the people they hire still have some common sense. It also shows that UDOT is proactive and not reactive because they said “Our bad. We’ve already taken action, and we’re going to take more.” In my opinion it worked. Nice job UDOT.

Activation and connection

I bought a new house, and I’m moving in this weekend . . . but I found something a little odd about the process of switching the gas (Questar) and the power (Rocky Mountain Power) to my name from the builder’s name.

Rocky Mountain Power Operator: There will be a $10 connection fee added to your account sir.
Me: Even though my power is already connected?
RMPO: Yes . . . explanation.
Me: You should change the name to a $10 transfer fee.

It just makes more sense.

Questar: There will be a connection fee added to your account sir.
Me: Okay. (I just went through this, so I know what she meant, but I thought in my head . . . you mean transfer fee because my gas is aleady connected).

What is the reasoning behind this?
Why on earth would Rocky Mountain Power and Questar tell a customer he is paying a “connection” fee for something that is already connected? A transfer fee makes much more sense, and it’s just a change of one word. I imagine they run into this everyday where people ask for clarification. I think it would be interesting to see how much shorter (on average) the calls would be for both companies simply by changing the wording when a customer calls in and is already connected.

Can’t and Won’t
It reminds me of the difference between can’t and won’t. Most of the time when you experience someone telling you “We can’t do that sir” what they’re really telling you is they “won’t” and it isn’t the same thing. Call me old fashioned (even though I’m not too old), but where and when did it become okay to no longer be straight forward and authentic?