Pizza Marketing

January 21, 2010

people don’t care if Dominoes Pizza sux. they order it cuz it delivers everywhere and it is open late. it is brand name recognition… and now they are saying they are going to make good pizza. honestly… I wanted to try it myself…. and in Poughkeepsie NY (lots of Italians here and great pizza), I’ve seen a lot of deliveries happening this week.

Domino’s Pizza’s new Pizza Turnaround campaign set off a wave of discussions in the social media world. The Pizza Turnaround video, which was produced by Domino’s, features Domino’s employees, including its head chefs, and some of the company’s marketing executives, admitting outright that the pizza sucks. Some of the quotes in the video include “Domino’s pizza crust is to me like cardboard,” a sentiment expressed in a focus group but echoed by Domino’s executives. “Doesn’t feel like there’s much love in Domino’s Pizza,” says another focus group participant.

This is, to be sure, a bold move, and many are applauding Domino’s for publicly owning up to making bad pizza. Everyone’s talking about transparency, but not many companies are really doing anything about it.

There’s a reason for that, of course. Only an idiot is 100% transparent.

Setting aside literal definitions, what does “transparent” mean? For publicly held companies, “transparent” has come to mean conducting business and doing accounting according to GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Every company is supposed to report its financial situation using the same measures as every other company, and using the same measures every quarter, to ensure that shareholders and regulators can read them and make valid judgments and comparisons.

In the social media world, transparency extends beyond finance, meaning something like “using social media to expose to the public the inner workings of the company and the candid thoughts of its executives and employees.”

So where does the publicly held company draw the line? The CEO can’t be 100% transparent on his or her blog. Comments about the company’s finances are regulated by FASB and the SEC. Comparisons to competitors are regulated by the FTC. When, what information, and in what format an officer of a publicly held company can disclose information is all strictly regulated.

One could argue in fact that Domino’s admission that its pizza isn’t up to par is contrary to its obligations to shareholders to maximize value. In fact, Domino’s stock traded around $11.39 today, not far from its 52-week high, and nearly triple its 52-week low of $4.76. So how bad can the pizza be?

Maybe we expect too much transparency from the companies we do business with. How transparent are you? Do you tell everybody everything you are doing and thinking, or are there some things you might omit? If you want to be 100% transparent, you would have to walk down the street saying out loud, “That’s an ugly shirt.” “You look so cool with your Bluetooth.” “Your girlfriend is way too hot for you.” We wouldn’t call that transparency, actually, we’d call it Tourette Syndrome.

Why then do we expect the companies we do business with to overexpose themselves? I think the social media “movement” has pressured companies to act irresponsibly. OK, the Domino’s thing is clever and is attracting a lot of attention. And maybe Domino’s feels it’s “working.” But I think these guys are subjecting themselves to an unnecessary beating. The following (with one letter masked) was displayed by Domino’s on its Pizza Turnaround site:

no I disagree. transparency doesn’t always work, but this kind will because Dominoes was never considered a quality brand and was successful because of it’s marketing and availability. claiming now that the pizza is now actually good is shrewd.

Marketing and Cannibalism

February 11, 2009

http://www.seesmic.com/#/video/uDQTKI74ln/watch


I’m eating Seth Godin

February 6, 2009

I just came back from outside. I noticed my grapevine in my garden had falled from all the snow. I fixed a few supports and within three minutes my grapevine was as good as last year. don’t you wish marketing people and government had the same level of intuition. there is a time for libertarianism and then there is a time where you have to fix a support. free range tribalism is another hucksterism


Marketing Pig

July 17, 2007


Marketing is just a form of a persuasion in capitalism. The key word is persuasion. In convincing another of our point of view there has to be a reference point. A language and understanding of what the negatives and positives of each action and object contains. For there to be a dialogue of negative then positive there must be point of agreement. If there is no point of agreement then what you have is all negative. That is where I am right now with the administration of facebook. All negative and they will not give me a reference point to act in a positive. facebook as a marketing tool claims that they act in their own discretion (which is the quality of being discreet). If the rules are arbitrary, then I can only perform a negative. The only logistical decision I have is to react in a deconstructionist manner. Being that facebook is the dominant platform of persuasion… (it is the only academic social network that protects the elitism of an academy).. and being that the terms are arbitrary and opaque, I can not market myself and it is of little use to pretend that it is a network of liberal thought and argument. I do not see any competing platform to share thoughts in yet… so therefor meaning is virtual and arbitrary. I must multiply my negatives because to multiply these negatives with a positive will give me a negative. This is the marketing state we are in right now. To use the Coors beer analogy: The reference of the beers actually needing to cool ended up not having meaning. There was no negative to reference, and therefor no positive

click here to see what in the hell I’m talking about in Beer Marketing


Marketing Pig

July 17, 2007


Marketing is just a form of a persuasion in capitalism. The key word is persuasion. In convincing another of our point of view there has to be a reference point. A language and understanding of what the negatives and positives of each action and object contains. For there to be a dialogue of negative then positive there must be point of agreement. If there is no point of agreement then what you have is all negative. That is where I am right now with the administration of facebook. All negative and they will not give me a reference point to act in a positive. facebook as a marketing tool claims that they act in their own discretion (which is the quality of being discreet). If the rules are arbitrary, then I can only perform a negative. The only logistical decision I have is to react in a deconstructionist manner. Being that facebook is the dominant platform of persuasion… (it is the only academic social network that protects the elitism of an academy).. and being that the terms are arbitrary and opaque, I can not market myself and it is of little use to pretend that it is a network of liberal thought and argument. I do not see any competing platform to share thoughts in yet… so therefor meaning is virtual and arbitrary. I must multiply my negatives because to multiply these negatives with a positive will give me a negative. This is the marketing state we are in right now. To use the Coors beer analogy: The reference of the beers actually needing to cool ended up not having meaning. There was no negative to reference, and therefor no positive

click here to see what in the hell I’m talking about in Beer Marketing


Shrink’s 60s Story

April 5, 2006










Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.