This morning while browsing through the Times Of India one innocuous looking ad suddenly jumped out as its implications sunk in. It had a very boring, oft used, hackneyed headline but when I looked at the name of the advertiser, I was surprised. For it was a joint ad of OLX.in and Flipkart. One brand which specialises in selling your old, outdated, not useful for some products online and the other who specialises in selling new, upto date, in sync with times products, also online. The line read upgrade now. Sell old goods on OLX.in and buy new ones on Flipkart. Brilliant. Great strategy, which automatically translated into effective creative. (Scroll below to see) Link http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/index.aspx?EID=31808&dt=20140806#
I have often wondered why brands which have synergistic products or which can be strategically in sync cannot talk together or use each other's strength. More so when a masterbrand has complimentary products addressing the same TG. When I handled Philips, I would wonder why the TV division not talk to an audio product buyer? Or the vice a versa? Why couldn't the packaging of a hi fi audio system not have an interesting leaflet about some great sounding TV's? Why couldn't the database of decorative hi end home lighting system buyers be shared for a hi end TV audience?
And today's ad actually proves that one can do good co branding communication with disparate brands also.
Imagine an ad for La opala dishes which says to keep the shine on these dishes always use Vim. Or an ad for a SUV which promotes a 3 day adventure package to tented living in Ranthambore.....And why just ads. It could be any mode of communication. DM, leaflet, contest.
The usual practical problems faced in these situations is the practicability. What's the share of each brand? Not just in size or space or airtime but also costs. Whose agency does the creative? Whose ego to be satisfied? And the problem exists even within divisions of the same company. It's not easy to sort out these issues even within say Philips Lighting or Philips appliances. I remember one of my bosses actually recommending me to stay away from such proposals. He had burnt his hand in the past as both of his clients whom he tried to involve in co communication accused him down the line of favouring the other one!
Ok, by now I hear some of you say that co communication has been existing for ages. Don't washing machine detergent manufactureres claim that they have been approved by so many brands. Or doesn't Samsung give you airtime free with Airtel or Aircel bundles an iPhone amazing free 3G offers. Yes, I hear and agree with you. To me that's no co branding. That's endorsement or enticement. And without spouting jargon it means that these are not based on an insight. But these are either natural extensions of a product usage or they are conveniently bundled products or manufacturers claims.
Look at the OLX.in and Flipkart ad and think about it. To me it has a solid insight. In today's disposable world and flaunting the latest here are two brands which allow you to dispose off what's out of fashion or need and upgrade to the latest. That's why this piece of communication is a wow.
Similarly a person buying a high end TV would want to have proper lighting in the room to facilitate good viewing and accentuate the beauty of the TV itself. A la opala buyer would want the beauty of his dinner set to be sustained. A 4x4 buyer is a high end buyer who would want to run the vehicle through it's pace.
I think there is a huge opportunity in co branding. Egos aside, practical issues can be sorted out, insights waiting to be developed. Any takers?
I have often wondered why brands which have synergistic products or which can be strategically in sync cannot talk together or use each other's strength. More so when a masterbrand has complimentary products addressing the same TG. When I handled Philips, I would wonder why the TV division not talk to an audio product buyer? Or the vice a versa? Why couldn't the packaging of a hi fi audio system not have an interesting leaflet about some great sounding TV's? Why couldn't the database of decorative hi end home lighting system buyers be shared for a hi end TV audience?
And today's ad actually proves that one can do good co branding communication with disparate brands also.
Imagine an ad for La opala dishes which says to keep the shine on these dishes always use Vim. Or an ad for a SUV which promotes a 3 day adventure package to tented living in Ranthambore.....And why just ads. It could be any mode of communication. DM, leaflet, contest.
The usual practical problems faced in these situations is the practicability. What's the share of each brand? Not just in size or space or airtime but also costs. Whose agency does the creative? Whose ego to be satisfied? And the problem exists even within divisions of the same company. It's not easy to sort out these issues even within say Philips Lighting or Philips appliances. I remember one of my bosses actually recommending me to stay away from such proposals. He had burnt his hand in the past as both of his clients whom he tried to involve in co communication accused him down the line of favouring the other one!
Ok, by now I hear some of you say that co communication has been existing for ages. Don't washing machine detergent manufactureres claim that they have been approved by so many brands. Or doesn't Samsung give you airtime free with Airtel or Aircel bundles an iPhone amazing free 3G offers. Yes, I hear and agree with you. To me that's no co branding. That's endorsement or enticement. And without spouting jargon it means that these are not based on an insight. But these are either natural extensions of a product usage or they are conveniently bundled products or manufacturers claims.
Look at the OLX.in and Flipkart ad and think about it. To me it has a solid insight. In today's disposable world and flaunting the latest here are two brands which allow you to dispose off what's out of fashion or need and upgrade to the latest. That's why this piece of communication is a wow.
Similarly a person buying a high end TV would want to have proper lighting in the room to facilitate good viewing and accentuate the beauty of the TV itself. A la opala buyer would want the beauty of his dinner set to be sustained. A 4x4 buyer is a high end buyer who would want to run the vehicle through it's pace.
I think there is a huge opportunity in co branding. Egos aside, practical issues can be sorted out, insights waiting to be developed. Any takers?
So very true. Totally agree. But yes as you rightly said - the challenge is in getting the brand heads and the respective agencies to agree and work together. In my personal opinion we will see more of this in the coming months and years thanks to young, aggressive & willing to take chances, Brands and CEO's.
ReplyDelete