The buzz has been there for quite a while now. To take a few recent examples, JWT’s 100 things to watch in 2011 had at least a couple of obvious manifestations – F-commerce (35), Group Manipulated Pricing (4) and more in terms of enablers and related items. (come to that in a bit) Trendwatching’s May 2011 trend is The F-Factor – “that’s F for friends, fans, followers who influence consumers’ purchasing decisions in ever more sophisticated ways”, in which they classify this further into discovery, rating, feedback, together, and ‘me’, the last one about curation itself becoming a product/service.

There are several technologies that will aid this trend in various capacities. Again, to refer to JWT’s deck everything from Automated Checkins (6) to Micro Businesses (51) NFC (56) to Personal Taste Graphs (67) to Tap To Pay (88) can play a direct or indirect part. Add to this increasing smartphone penetration and its impact on purchasing behaviour (check out a study by Google) and interesting services like Localmind, which uses 4sq check ins and location to help users engage in Q&A, or LocalResponse, that uses tweets and check-in data to create a marketing platform for brands to target consumers in real time. and this is sure to be an interesting space with plenty of $$ involved.

That (obviously) explains why the usual suspects are making strides – Facebook with its check-in deals and Social deals and more importantly increasing the scope and penetration of Connect, Open Graph, Instant Personalisation (though), Google with its Latitude, Offers, expansion of Product Search to more countries (via) and even its fashion shop, Amazon with its new membership-only fashion sales site and so on.

But more than these services, the applications that interest me are from the ‘real’ products that I come across. Levi’s remains one of my favourites. And the one that excited me much was Pepsi’s Social Vending Machine. It allows a user to buy a drink for your friend and add a personal video message while at it. After you provide the friend’s name and number, he receives a text message with a code which he can redeem at the nearest vending machine and watch that video you made. (via) Probably a gawky start, some would say, but think of the potential applications.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJaEVEoEETA

It’s not that there won’t be challenges – privacy is the obvious one. Brands will also have to be careful about their natural tendency for broadcasting and aim to be relevant in time and other contexts. They will also have to integrate offline and online well. But despite these and more that might crop up, I think this will be fun with its synergy with Social CRM and its perspective on the answer to that omnipresent social media ROI question.

Bonus read: Paul Adams on How your customers’ social circles influence what they buy, what they do and where they go

until next time, social bill sharing?

PS: Interestingly, Coke had a friendship machine of its own too

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj3QLLTFDX8

This debate was also interesting from the perspective of what I wrote last week – brand identity and real time. But before we get there, my 2 cents on the debate. I would also credit Nike for the same reasons Bhat stated – strategy, product integration and ease of participation (execution). That is what separates it from say a ‘Pallu scoop’, which is fun and pure recall, or a ‘Get Idea’, which still hasn’t given me an idea of how it’s keeping cricket clean.  [yes, they aren’t apples, but they were the other hugely visible campaigns]

Big ticket result-based events (including movies, which Karthik has mentioned) is a risk-reward game because there really isn’t any data that allows you to place sure-shot bets. But the way I see it, you can place a successful bet, and still not gain enough mileage (bad erm, ideas, bad execution etc). Nike got it right, and there was some hard work involved.

Come to think of it, I wonder if there’s any other approach Nike could’ve taken, especially since they were the official apparel sponsors. Look at the competition – Adidas had a Tendulkar ad and Reebok had nothing. It was a ‘once in 4 years’ opportunity and they seized it. India winning the cup was a key factor in the campaign’s success, but not the only one. Also, I don’t know if they had a back up plan – a “we’ll be back in 2015”, “thank you for giving it your best shot”, “bled to death”. Ok, not the last one, but you get the idea. Maybe they did and would’ve come out smelling like roses anyway. In any case, the efficacy of the campaign is probably best decided after it ends. In this case, it made Nike the buzz brand with other heavyweights in the fray, including the mighty Zoozoos. (Loved them though)

Meanwhile, by design or not, Nike’s approach was also quite a “Just Do it” one. (hindsight/retrofit) From the last post’s perspective, I wonder how much/whether that identity played a part in the design and success of the campaign. But on big events, celebrity endorsements etc, going forward, real time management of campaigns will increasingly become a requirement, thanks to the instant feedback tools that exist. Perhaps brands should formulate ‘what if scenarios’ and corresponding approaches when they plan large scale campaigns, especially when it’s linked to events that don’t offer much support in the form of data. The other way is to scale after the relevant data comes in, but that would involve quite an execution effort.

until next time, blue positive

PS: Nike, next time, stadium checkins and a Bleed Blue 4sq badge too please

I remember writing about this a few weeks back, and asking whether content is merely a titular king and distribution is the real power. Its ironic because much of the power of the web’s second wave is in the ability to create content and distribute it fast. But over a period of time, the platforms we use for sharing have undergone a consolidation. The presence of traditional media outlets and brands on these platforms validate this.

Now if we zoom out further and consider the various other things that are making their presence felt – social gaming, location based services (check out the Foursquare-Pepsi and SCNGR-Coke deals, and the new contexts of advertising they’re creating), group buying; apps on iPhone/ iPad (Murdoch and Branson are making a newspaper/magazine specifically for iPad) and Android. (do add on) This is in addition to the terrains that the incumbents – Google, Facebook, Apple, Twitter will discover and develop at least for some more time, and the technological possibilities that will arise. (eg. Augmented Reality, and the return of QR codes) Each of them are building their own distribution systems, and its difficult to bundle all the ‘content’ that appears on them under one umbrella. And that’s only the digital world.

All of this also makes me think of destination sites. I can count mine on one hand. Every other consumption is via Reader/Twitter/Facebook and occasionally email. When the web (and its consumption) is rebuilt around people and their connections, what value does a destination site (belonging to a brand) add? How does the brand deal with fragmentation? The good news for the brands is that there are many more options than ever before. Not every campaign needs to be a TVC, radio spot, newspaper ad, site banner. There are smaller, more scalable and more flexible options. The challenge is to find them, and develop things that enable them to connect with the consumers. We live in interesting times indeed.

until next time, many kings and many thrones

So what is the data that’s getting generated? As social networks evolve, the role that they play in the individual’s life is also evolving. While flow of information, and communication seem to find social networks as natural conduits, the networks are also now sources of entertainment for many. (study by Edelman) What does this entail for brands, their communication and the content they generate?

Amidst the social network revolution, brands have been trying hard to eke out a place for themselves – to slide in easily into the conversations, and lives of individual users. Some have been successful, and some have not, the latter mostly when they try to use these as distribution channels for other media content alone. I read a few days back that the two official sponsors for the World Cup – Adidas and Coke, had been trumped by their competitors – Nike, and Pepsi, as far as WOM goes. Not surprising, both tell excellent stories. It makes us feel.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idLG6jh23yE

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQmu48sZohc

There’s this excellent presentation by Rory Sutherland about intangible, and perceived value that brands create. A bit dated, but I happened to see it recently. It made me think about Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs and the tangibility of various levels.

As civilisation advances and scarcities and abundance are rapidly traded, and as brands progress, don’t the lower levels of Maslow’s needs hierarchy become hygiene? So, would users prefer brands that help them in the esteem and self actualisation areas? It perhaps might be an example of ‘seeing the subtext you want to see’, but the Nike ad – ‘Write the Future’ seemed to be all about self actualisation and the Pepsi’s ‘Oh Africa’ seemed to be all about an ever-changing crowd that seems to be impossible to keep pace with. To quote Clay Shirky, “The category of ‘consumer’ is now a temporary behavior rather than a permanent identity.”

Which brings me back to the data explosion. The challenge, I guess, is an old one. Finding motivations, sensing patterns out of all the data to understand why we ‘Like’, why we ‘share’, and so on, and then give us a value proposition. With rapidly evolving technologies, even the value needs to adapt much faster than before, because if the brand is late, there’ll be another that delivers. But then again, at higher need levels, when the individuality/uniqueness quotient increases, will the manifestation of needs show a collective pattern? Or will the individual’s behaviour pattern become more important for brands? Multiple data sets, multiple patterns, multiple challenges. Interesting times indeed

Meanwhile, here’s one closer home. (via Gaurav) A very interesting project by Tithiya Sharma – The 100 Heroes Project. I’m sure it’ll be a wonderful story and if I were an airline brand or even a MakeMyTrip/Cleartrip or anything to do with travel, I’d take a look at the project.

until next time, tripping on data

And there’s the first example, which is easily becoming THE example now, for bad PR. BP – if the spill wasn’t bad enough, there was the spillage – the fake PR account – advice on what/why BP should or should not do with it, the tweet billboards, an old (fake) ad, the ironic sign, the ghastly, ghastly images, the user created logos, a coffee parody, and the post from the man who created BPGlobalPR. BP’s losses as a brand (intangible?) is much more than the real $costs that have been speculated. Meanwhile, it has finally reached out to the @BPGlobalPR account. (While on the topic, do check out Rob Cottingham’s excellent take on the subject)

The only commonality I’m looking at is the user generated content (or discontent). I don’t think this is an area which can be gamed easily. Sure, you can try to manipulate events and people, and search engines, try some good old PR, but there are no guarantees that it won’t boomerang. And I think it holds true across the spectrum – the two cases are polar opposites in terms of magnitude of the event, what the crowd did to it, and what the brand tried to do.

Deviating a bit. I read “Arundhati Roy on ‘War of People‘”, where she took the scope of the Naxal issue into corporate boardrooms, and was immediately reminded of Umair Haque’s latest post titled “Ethical Capital is Capitalism’s new cornerstone“. He defines Ethical capital as “the stock of techniques, tools, and practices not just for creating value, but for defining and refining values, that an economy possesses”, and CSR, social investment, social entrepreneurship etc as the baby steps towards building it. But the corporate world still doesn’t understand the rewiring, as he himself notes. And here’s where we loop back, I don’t think this building of ethical capital can be gamed either.

I can spot an increasing number of efforts – Pepsi’s Refresh Project, their efforts for production sustainability, Nokia’s eco profile for new products, their bicycle charger kit, to name a few. While the cynic in me sometimes disses official CSR, I realise its perhaps a level that has to be crossed before we reach out for bigger things. I also see efforts from the consumer side  –  CarrotMob (via Surekha)

I see all of this as a trend where users are linking the brands they use, and their consumption, to the larger context of their lives and the even larger context of the world they inhabit, and the culture they consume and create. The ‘badges’ have changed, they’d like to associate themselves with brands that accommodate or at least work towards these badges.  In the foreseeable future, I think that brands which understand this will not only align more people on their side, but also have inherent features and processes which would allow them to be transparent, reduce these costly mistakes, and admit to their mistakes without the PR approaches that are drawing flak now.

until next time, PR pressure?

But thankfully, the national animal ensured that we continued the debate. Aircel’s ‘Save the Tiger’ has also not been given a label, but it does give a good handle to convey my thoughts on CSR, especially since there are at least a couple of good posts on it already, by L.Bhat and Karthik. Harish’s ‘Branding with a cause‘ is a more general, but very relevant read in this context. Aircel’s high decibel campaign ensured that most of everyone knew there were only 1411 tigers left. If awareness was the objective, as stated, it’s been done, especially since the slacktivist generation has retweeted and facebook-fanned it so much that even the tigers must know now. They haven’t been asked whether they want to be saved in a planet full of us, but that’s a different debate. So is the debate whether Aircel should complete the loop, after all why can’t we? (and maybe there’s another phase anyway) But I digress, and generalise. Sorry.

(Image Courtesy: Tom Fishburne)

The questions I have are these. Should CSR be related to the business domain or not? Aircel’s was not, but as Surekha rightly pointed out, they chose a topic that would connect with their target audience. My problem with that, though it helps stand out from the clutter in a commodity category, is the lack of context. With Pepsi, though one could say the project has nothing to do with sugared water, there was always a ‘youth’ context, which was established long ago. Now, if it were connected with the business, and it is possible with say, the pepsi project (surekha gave me at least 2 excellent ideas) I would turn around and say, vested interests, and doubt the sincerity of their efforts. ‘The big corporate giving us eyewash’ view. It would also bring in ROI measures etc, which I find hard to associate with CSR. Roshni put it succinctly when she said ‘sort of like proclaiming, hey, we did charity’.

In trying to find a solution, I remembered a post by Umair Haque on ‘Great to good, which, perhaps unwittingly, made me think of a similarity between social media and CSR. As mentioned in my last post, the piecemeal approach to social media is something I dislike. Its as though it exists stand alone inside a box, I think I have a similar problem with CSR as a label. So, (simplistically put), what if the label were to be taken of and every process was carried out with an inbuilt csr approach – from creating environmentally friendly, sustainable products/projects and choice of partners/vendors to eco friendly packaging and everything in between? Oh yes, practical business considerations. I forgot.

until next time, with great responsibility comes great power?

Relevant Read: Cause Effect

PS: JK cement deserves appreciation for its support of an unrelated, but worthy cause – bikinis

PPS: While on tigers, this one, by my good friend Blues, is a killer read

Disclosure: I work with The Times Group

There was some amount of Twitter buzz a couple of days ago on the article carried in the (city edition) Times about Arindam C’s new book selling a lakh of copies in 10 days. This also appeared in a post at “Don’t trust the Indian media”, in the context of ‘paid-for news’. The post dealt with the TV medium primarily, but also noted that in the coming years, consumption will be not be medium specific.

Like I’ve written before in the context of content marketing, the key factor, irrespective of platform, amidst the changing nature of advertisers, publishers and consumers and the relationships between  them is trust.  In a sense regular advertising is also paid-for news, but its form is such that one immediately knows its paid for. With the influx of advertorials and paid-for news, the lines began to blur fast, with  credibility beginning to suffer.

In an increasingly user generated environment (almost all of social media is just that) advertisers (brands) now have a way to source positive content without paying obscene amounts for it. They can find relevant spokespersons who have their niche, but contextually relevant fan following. Of course, on the flip side, finding them is still a task. But they already have a name for it – ‘social influencer relationship management’ The other point is that even the nature of sharing – blogs/microblogs/statuses are in a constant state of flux. Meanwhile, like Shefaly pointed out in the comments, it is still relatively easy to get away with non-disclosure on the web.

But despite all that, and the fact that I believe in the loop of objective-> idea/strategy-> medium, I’d say that the web is more advanced than other media in terms of content marketing, primarily because user generated content, and discontent, has been an integral part of its evolution. Users, potential users, all talk to each other, and trust evolves. A crowd is involved, conversations happen. Also, with more and more lives being lived with an audience in mind, and people becoming conscious of how they’re perceived online, hopefully it will ‘become too costly to be evil’ (non disclosure)

And that’s why its erm, refreshing, when I see brands making a strategic commitment to the digital space. Pepsi recently junked Super Bowl for the first time in 23 years and has included $20 million in grants for the Pepsi Refresh Project. Some say, its a risk, but to me its about as risky as putting a 30 sec ad that might get trashed. Moreover, its not an isolated thing. I recently read about Pepsi using Foursquare to fund a youth mentoring program called Camp Interactive, which helps youth explore technology and environment. Consistent efforts like this will get them unpaid editorial space and buzz at least in the online space.

Closer home, Nokia is using a digital dominated strategy for N97, in its first 4 months of launch. I liked it because of the reasons stated – “Digital media blends very well with the product features of N97 Mini. Also, the audience to be targeted is all available online.” That sounds like its reasoned out well, though I’d also like to see a similar approach to execution too. There are a couple of things I am hoping for in addition to the obligatory display advertising – that Nokia not make this a short term venture, because though this product might become non priority for them in a few months, the poor sod who bought it will still want to connect with them online. The second hope is that they experiment with content marketing, and go a little beyond the ‘over-the-counter’ blogger outreach stuff.

In the case of Pepsi, its a concept, an idea. In the case of Nokia, they have a product based strategy. In both cases, there is a potential for natural buzz, which to me is the way it should be. Buzz should be a result of a good product/strategy, too many time it IS the strategy, and that is what has caused things like ‘paid-for content’. The bigger hope in all this, of course,  is that an increasing commitment to the evolving digital space will force advertisers and brands to be on the ball, and in that, a better mindset will evolve, one that believes in a two way communication approach, as opposed to blind advertising and paid-for content.

Its interesting that on one hand, networks, brands and individuals are trying to carve out a niche based on trust, using digital media for reach, and on the other hand, we have the news media, the original custodians of trust,  despite guilt , oops,  guild feelings, using their massive reach to push one way communication.

until next time, news making

PS: See you in a fortnight

So, let’s begin with Coke’s TVC. Coke has brought the ‘Open Happiness’ theme (which i’d written about earlier) to India, and has started the campaign with an ad featuring Gautam Gambhir. (because he’s an opener? ok sorry) The ad shows how the game of cricket (with Coke) adds fun and refreshment in our lives and builds community  by sharing our moments of happiness together – in this case, a cricket match. Gautham Gambhir brings to life a regular hangout joint by offering ‘ a dost free with every Coke’. The wife uncharitably commented that a free dosa might get more response!!

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S59gN7bl6As

I honestly wasn’t impressed with the ‘Open Happiness’ theme anyway- Coke has done much better campaigns before, and this has cemented that opinion. Unless the remaining ads do wonders, I doubt if that opinion will change.  In fact I got thinking about Coke’s Slumdog association, rather dissociation, which i wrote about earlier. If they had allowed that association, the Oscar win would have gone wonderfully with the theme, and the Oscar is a global thing. They could’ve even done a cheering ad at the bottom of the screen whenever SDM got an award. (at least in the repeat telecast). Oh well, why cry over spilt cola.

On to Pepsi’s latest TVC. With the cricket team in action, and IPL coming up, it looks like Pepsi has (thankfully) decided to shelf R.Kap and D.Pad for a while, and move on to Dhoni and Co. This is continuing the path of “echoing youth sentiment” – the last ad talked about how padhai wasn’t the only way to success, and this one talks of how people use their connections (jaanta hain mera baap kaun hai?) to get ahead in life. The concept, though a bit jaded, might actually work because of the execution (Sehwag’s wig’s contribution must be noted)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2xS3P_Ejjg

And now Sprite. I had written sometime back about how Sprite is going about things in a very methodical manner. In plain words, I think they have a strategy, and from the numbers it seems to be working. Clear Hai !! They’ve added the  no nonsense approach to their product benefit of slaking thirst and the renditions have been great so far. As a massive Fido Dido fan (7 up) I can only grudgingly admire. Brilliant. They have released two ads recently, but they really don’t measure up to the earlier work.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtQr9gwb_-I

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-vVSEDOWmA

The positioning has gotten a bit diluted, I felt, maybe the later ads will be better. Lets hope someone gives them something to spoof on. And meanwhile, the big news is that King Khan, after Pepsi’s non renewal of his contract, will now say ‘Baki Sab Bakwas’. Yes, he is Sprite’s new brand ambassador!! Coke has the most awesome Bollywood portfolio now – Aamir for Coke, SRK for Sprite, and Akshay for Thums Up.

Speaking of which, Thums Up has also released its TVC, which features Akshay in a double role.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVQUcO4GMus

The typical Akshay-Thums Up ad, all slick action and stunts, centred around “will do anything for a Thums Up”. Wonder if Pepsi will spoof like last time.

I also saw a couple of Mirinda ads, featuring Asin, very entertaining ones, but with a distinct south Indian flavour, which, am not sure will work across India (especially the market ones, which relies on wordplay a lot)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65DbA-baZYA

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Esp026fOXlE&NR=1

The smaller 15 second ones which would work for a national audience don’t reach the same level as the ones above.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCiZ6ZCiDQ8

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em8_fbMGRKI

7 Up has been silent so far. I hope they do something good with Fido Dido, which is a lot to ask for, considering the work so far. I couldn’t help but wonder the good use that Fido could’ve been put to in social media. This is the only brand which is instinctively identified with a character, and in a medium in which people like to talk to people and not brands, Fido could’ve served as a wonderful front end for the brand. His coolness wowed one generation, if someone thinks hard enough, he could easily wow many more too. Will he make a comeback with the new Pepsi lemon drink – Nimbooz? I, for one, hope he does.

With the uninspiring 7Up and even Mirinda, Pepsi really has no flanking products. Coke, on the other hand, has two of its brands at the top. Pepsi needs a miracle now, to claw back. I have a feeling that Sprite is getting ready for the war for the top spot, and Pepsi played into their hands by releasing SRK. Thums Up, with Akshay at #1, and within touching distance Sprite at #2, with Shah Rukh. With these two sharing icy cold vibes these days in real life over the Bollywood #1 position, I think, we have a thriller on our hands.

until next time, cold war!!

PS. Interesting tactic by Coke – Don’t Dew it, a 24-ounce Vault (Coke) free with any purchase of a 20 ounce Mountain Dew (Pespsi)

Pepsi began proceedings with its new logo, accompanied by a tagline “Every generation refreshes the world”. You can catch an entire set of creatives in this New Year video. On an aside, the (yet to be proved conclusively) brief for this campaign has caused much amusement. You really have to take a look – it is bizarre and includes everything from gravitational pull and thr relativity of space-time to Mona Lisa and the Bible!! (via psfk) Meanwhile, Coke rolled out its ‘Open Happiness’ campaign a few weeks later, complete with a massive campaign and 2 new Super Bowl spots, prompting the question “Who smiled first“. The answer turned out to be Obama, but Pepsi claimed that finally Coke was following them. Coke pointed out that it had started using smiley logos six months back.

Critics have been skeptical about Coke moving away from the ‘Coke side of life’. Pepsi, they say, having always been a youthful brand has been able to bring out a more buoyant and less laboured campaign. In India, they’ve decided to be totally Youngistan, with SRK no longer a brand ambassador, leaving us stuck with Ranbir Kapoor’s adventures. Some respite recently from Dhoni and gang, with the baap connection.

Meanwhile, these campaigns also made me wonder whether typical mass media communication and feel good campaigns are indeed the way to connect during such troubled times,  more so when I read this article by Tom Martin in AdAge. It talks about “the simple human need to connect to others.”

And that brings me to a brilliant campaign I’ve seen (virtually) – froth brand this time, instead of fizz- Starbucks’ “I’m In” campaign, (in association with ‘Hands On Network’) “ an initiative to make it easy to participate in the President-elect’s call for national service.” The campaign allows a person to pledge five hours or more of community service toward a local volunteer opportunity of choice. It rewards the person with a free coffee. The goal is to raise pledges in excess of one million hours of service from all over the country. You can catch the results here. This is what is correctly described as ‘marketing with meaning‘ – which includes several facets – social, personal, storytelling, disruptive, responsible, each of which gives individuals different sets of incentives to be part of the campaign. Starbucks timed the campaign brilliantly – Obama’s inauguration week, and got itself an Oprah Effect. It has all the ingredients required to make a consumer want to be associated with the campaign, and has used the social web very well.

Now I’m not sure of Coke/Pepsi in the US have tangible renditions of the happiness theme on ground, but I know several campaigns in India which have paid lip service to excellent themes/ideas and have ended up looking superficial. In the times and circumstances we live in, there are excellent opportunities for brands to genuinely do good to society within the sphere of their category, and thereby increase their equity in the consumer’s mind.  (Jaago re is a great example) I wonder how many brands will see this.

until next time, a lot can happen over coffee

PS. While on fizzy stuff, did you hear about the RSS launching cow’s urine as a soft drink? Called gau-jal, its undergoing laboratory tests and would be launched “very soon, maybe by the end of this year”. Sumant suggests Mo (rarji) Desai in low riding jeans, basketball jersey and bling, as brand ambassador, and I suggested the tagline Pee yo! Wonder if Coke and Pepsi are pissed

Its not difficult to imagine the costs involved in such an exercise, for a global brand. The design cost itself is rumoured to be above $1 million. This 11th logo, in a history of 110 years, comes after 6 years. (the last  update was in 2002) The announcement campaign is expected to roll out in 2009. Experts have already started commenting about the new logo, we’ll come to that later.

Continuing on the lines of the strategic intent outlined by the Pepsi exec, Pepsi did a ‘DM’ exercise by sending 3 packages to 25 “digital and social media influencers”, in sequence, each package containing cans representing different logo designs. (via Adrants). They’ve also started a ‘Room’ on Friendfeed, called The Pepsi Cooler, where ‘room mates’ have conversations (moderated) about Pepsi. The last time I checked, there were 225 members, and some very interesting conversations. Again, the intent is just fine, and there are some interesting uses being made of Flickr and Wordle. Perhaps Pepsi is going about it right, to have branded water cooler conversations.

Some India specific talk before we get to the logo. India has seen a plethora of logo changes in the past few months- Hutch to Vodafone, Canara Bank, Shopper’s Stop, India Post, Union Bank of India, among others. Out of these, I’d say that Vodafone’s task was the toughest, in terms of ensuring logo changes at the ground level, because of the multitude of vendors. Though i believe that Vodafone did a decent job, i still see Hutch in many places.

That should throw some light on the magnitude of the task ahead for Pepsi. I don’t know how this works in the US, but in India, I’ve seen most Pepsi Coolers (supplied to restaurants, kirana stores) store everything but Pepsi – that incudes competitors like Coke to Nestle Curd!! And that thought made me consider the vast ocean of cultural and experiential differences that lie between the average friendfeed user and the Tier 3 town citizen, in a country like india. It matters, because Pepsi is a global brand!!

To me, the logo is a symbol

• for the consumer, a symbol of trust and association with the brand
• for the marketer, a symbol of the attributes that he wants the brand to stand for

Yes, a good logo can do a lot of work for the brand, and create associations in the consumer’s mind, but (say, for an FMCG brand like Pepsi) how much can the cool  new logo and the virtual rooms contribute to the experience of the real consumer, especially in India? Till I stopped consuming aerated drinks a couple of years back, I was a Pepsiholic, it had nothing to do with taste, and it had everything to do with the brand and its attitude. But i wonder how much the ‘brand’ matters in the Tier 3 town, where the concept of social networking, is the consumer walking to the ‘cool drinks’ shop, asking for a ‘thanda’ and the shopkeeper knowing which brand he is asking for, from experience.

I really don’t know if the ocean will ever be bridged, and whether the logo or the smart brand work happening digitally will ever make a difference to the vast majority of Indian consumers, many of whom have vaguely heard of the internet. With reference to the stated intent, I am intrigued, how will Pepsi become/create a social object in such a scenario, or will parts of the digital medium always be confined to a corner of the long tail?

until next time, non digital natives