Starbucks "Project Red" Campaign

I just read in today's Ad Age online that Starbucks has entered into a holiday promotion with Project Red. Clearly, a worthwhile endeavor. And the Starbucks brand, along with the Starbucks consumer, certainly fits with Red. But the fact that they entered into this partnership "amid projections that it won't see improved same store sales until 2009" really rubs me the wrong way.

If Starbucks mission is to be a responsible company, why wait until now to sign up with Red. Why wait until after reporting really disappointing Q4 profit and same store sales results. Sort of rhetorical questions. And they acknowledge the effort is only a promotional program. Other Red partners like Gap, Converse, Apple and Hallmark (as reported in this article) have long ago built Red into their ongoing product programs.

Transparency is supposed to be a good thing. But in this case, it's just too easy to see through. While I can't argue with the cause, I think the impetus for the effort - particularly for Starbucks - is just wrong.

Promising Signs For The Relaunch Of A Global Healthcare Brand

We're relaunching a global cardiac safety brand in the next couple of months. To begin to educate and engage inside, we just had our first internal session yesterday with Brand Ambassadors (those people - who based on Senior Leadership input - represent each department within the organization and who will be the lead liaison between employees and their new brand).

It's one thing to get Board and Senior Leadership sign-off on brand direction. But you really find out if you nailed it when those on the front-lines feel like they are one with the new brand. When they can see themselves in the new brand idea. When they're inspired and motivated by it. When it's aspirational, but within their grasp.

To a person, our Brand Ambassadors left our session with a stronger connection to the organization and to each other. They're fully engaged and on board. And are excited that they get to carry the torch for new brand. Yesterday was a great day. And now the hard work starts.

What's happening to the Starbucks brand?

When times are tough, people hold on to those small vices that make them feel like things are still okay. Yet Starbuck's Q4 profits plummeted. Though restructuring charges and other costs associated with their turnaround plan are built into the numbers, this result causes one to consider what's really going on.

Are people trading off for Dunkin? Are they going through the McD's drive through on their way to work (and enjoying a much better McD's cup of coffee)? Has WaWa, or even the local deli, become a much more attractive and far less costly stop. Ultimately, the answer is yes. Because Starbuck's position as a "third-place" has lost some traction.

So what's happened? Seems that a third-place given these troubling times would be just what people are yearning for. A place of refuge - to get away from the maddening world. And a whole lot less expensive than cozying up to the bar. But now it's only come down to the coffee. What's led to the watering down of the Starbuck's experience?

Some question whether the Starbucks brand has lost its soul, its special place as a local neighborhood-feeling destination. I think the answer is yes. And I think the solution is going back to what made it so different and special in the first place – a warm and inviting experiential brand that just happens to serve coffee.

Lessons from Microsoft: When not to revitalize a brand

Saw the brilliant Apple tv spot (for the umpteenth time) in which "Bill" is apportioning dollars between funding Microsoft advertising and fixing Vista. Started to think about how Microsoft should respond to Apple's attack ads, separate from their multi-hundred million dollar "I'm A PC" campaign.

Vista-specific advertising isn't the answer, because the product is inferior. So why fuel the fire even further. In addition, why spend more money giving Apple any more air time. Also, what could Microsoft possibly say that doesn't make them look foolish – "we've finally fixed a product that we know really sucked; sorry to the millions of people who suffered through the Vista experience."

I think that Vista's reputation is so tarnished at this point that it doesn't pay to try to revitalize it. And how do you tell people, without acknowledging that you screwed up in the first place (along with consumers knowing full well that your apology isn't quite as sincere as when J&J masterfully handled their Tylenol scare).

How about evolving away from Vista. From a product with an awful reputation that's a drag on the corporate brand. Introduce (and fix) the next generation of operating system. It would certainly give Microsoft a cleaner slate. And a new platform to drive what can only be a more positive message. Give all those people who proudly stand up and say "I'm A PC" something to be proud of -- because they're most likely using PC's now only because they have to. Otherwise, why would they want to. Unless you're prone to lemming tendencies.

And when they do introduce the new operating system – look beyond advertising. Consider the strategic use of PR – to help impart a message that sounds strong enough to come from a leader but humble enough to acknowledge that you screwed up - and it won't happen again.