twenty two years in the waiting, The MAG is Back From The Future
it took about thirty seconds. thirty seconds from receiving this IM from Alex S... to fall utterly in love.
"i could see you in those
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2011/09/back-to-the-future-nike-air-mags-are-real-and-glorious/"
the link was to this:
"Back To The Future Nike Air Mags Are Real And Glorious" was Gizmodo's Geek Out's take on today's news. I couldn't agree more
the world was awake, and had been alerted to the existence of The MAG, brought Back From The Future by Nike. as a post on Nike's site explains:
"The NIKE MAG is no longer the “greatest shoe never made.” The mythical shoe that originally captured the imagination of audiences in Back to the Future II is being released – and they’re here to help create a future without Parkinson’s disease ... 1,500 pairs of the 2011 NIKE MAG will be auctioned on eBay with all net proceeds going directly to The Michael J. Fox Foundation. Each day for the duration of the ten-day auction, one hundred and fifty pairs of the 2011 NIKE MAG shoes will be made available ..."
as sneaks go it's a stunning piece of work and - with the exception of power laces - is as fine a replica of Marty's originals that you'll find:
then and now - Marty's original 2015 sneaks and the ones revealed today [source]
it arrived with this beautiful teaser clip:
a clip which isn't alone ... a gamut of content and AV collateral has been released to support the arrival of the 1,500 pairs, and not a corner has been cut - Doc Brown himself is on board:
the distribution model is designed to extract maximum value from the shoes. by selling on Ebay, Nike ensure that - with such a strictly limited supply (there's one pair for every 4.5 million people on the planet) - it doesn't just find those individuals with the money to invest in these puppies, but engages those individuals in what is sure to be a fierce bidding war, with each other, to own their slice of the impossible.
everyone wins.
those of us who have been waiting since 1989 for "the greatest shoe never made" to arrive finally get to see it. a lucky few will even get to own it. the Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research will get a shedload of money to fight Parkinson's (even if the average selling price is a conservative $5,000, the MAGs will generate over $7.5m in revenue).
Ebay get a burst of activity on their platform, part of which will no doubt fulfill the hugely valuable role of getting inactive registered users to engage with the site. and as for Nike ... money can't buy publicity, the adoration of sneaker fans everywhere, and a global bidding war to get a hold of their product...
winners all round - The Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, Ebay and Nike
as marketing efforts go, its textbook best practice:
- innovate and invest in creating products that have currency and will be in high demand
- strictly limit supply
- fewer bigger better partnerships to deliver and deploy the initiative
- invest in credibility (Christopher Lloyd is in the ad for goodness sake)
- sacrifice profits in favour of positive PR and goodwill
- don't buy media when you can earn it
- invest in sharable high quality content
- rigorously control timing to maximise interest and dominate news and conversation
- product out, not advertising in
the awesomeness of these shoes is outdone only by the awesomeness of the marketing machine that has announced them to the world. what happens over the next ten days remains to be seen, but for now its all eyes on Ebay - where, only 4 1/2 hours into day one's auction, bids for every pair of size 9s are sitting at between $3,500 and $4,000.
tempted?
good luck.
Coles and Woolies' Death Star moment: the beginnings of the brand rebellion in Australia's Supermarket Store Wars
my return from a rather long winter blogging break has been greeted with the glad tidings that some brands have finally chosen to take a stand against the big two Australian supermarkets. Adnews reports today that Glenn Cooper, boss of Coopers Brewery has described Coles and Woolies as being the "killers of Aussie brands". Cooper went further:
SMH only last week reported that this is an opinion recently echoed by no less than Heinz' chief financial officer and executive vice-president Arthur Winkleblack. in a briefing to US analysts on the company's first-quarter earnings, Winkleblack specifically name-checked the Australian supermarket sector and blamed them for an erosion of its margins. sentiments echoed by Heinz' chairman and chief executive Bill Johnson:
the supermarket's argument is manifold and includes the rationale that this is all in consumers' interest - a Coles spokesman, in response to Winkleblack's comments, stated that "We agree with Heinz's comments that companies need to be competitive to ensure the best outcomes for customers."
but consumers don't benefit from Supermarket competition. the concensus of an April opinion piece in the Sydney Morning Herald was that consumers - if they see any benefit at all - see it only in the short term. Academic Angela Paladino commented that:
Nick Stance, Chief Executive of Choice agreed:
there are only two winners in Coles and Woolies' Store Wars; and that's Coles and Woolies. brands have and continue to exist at the mercy of these distribution Death Stars. now Coopers and Heinz have come out of the supermarket closet. it's just two brands. but that's two more brands than a few months ago.
Coopers and Heinz's coming out is important. brands standing up to Coles and Woolies is important, because the dominance of Coles and Woolies is hurting brands ... not least in expectations of media investment...
I've sat in more meetings that I care to recall where there have been two invisible seats at the table. in discussions where the spectre of supermarket's expectations for media investment loom large over marketers, marketers dependent on these two Death Stars for significant - and often increasing - distrutions volumes.
it's a sweeping generalisation to say that Australian brands are too dependent on the broadcast interruption model (of which TV spot advertising is the main solution) for their marketing needs. never-the-less its a generalisation that I believe is true. a reliance on this 20th Century marketing model isn't just down to the pressures and expectations of Coles and Woolies on media spends, but they sure as hell play a very significant part: too many brands over-invest in broadcast interruption because its what supermarkets want and expect to see on those brands' media schedules. supermarkets' expectations are holding back brands' media innovation potential.
but the effect and influence isn't limited to consequences above-the-line (a term which I hate but I'll run with anyway). prices are down. great. but its not the supermarkets funding this price decrease - it's brands. manufacturers are paying for prices to be down with their below-the-line (ditto) budgets. and because prices are down for good manufacturers will be paying for them to be down ... for good.
The Order of Coopers - owned and earned media curating a community for the brand
what is phenomenal in this context are the levels of innovation that do get out of markets and agencies' doors and into the world. despite the vast majority of bought media investment being diverted to an outdated (and actually never that well proven model), Coopers - for example - have built a hugely utilised online site and community. they are investing in owned and earned media that are building a community with direct links to their brand and business that side-steps the supermarkets' Death Stars.
brands, it would seem, are starting to have had enough. the Supermarket's weaponary have become simply too powerful to ignore. to paraphrase Senator Organa, 'the more you tighten your grip Coles and Woolies, the more brands will slip through your fingers'.
the rebellion, I very much hope, has begun.
full disclosure: I work as a media strategist for several brands that have distribution through Coles and Woolworths in Australia. the above comments reflect my, and my opinions alone. the advice and recommendations I make to brands take these - as well as other - opinions and considerations into account.
Posted by chris stephenson on Wednesday, 07 September 2011 at 18:38 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)