THE CROSSED COW

After years of waiting, Apple and Steve Jobs have finally announced the worst best kept secret in gadget history – the iPad.

Ever since Jobs and Co. created the iPhone, there has been intense speculation that Apple were going to re-invent the Newton, with all kind of rumours about what the device would be and what it would be capable of.

For those of you that have been living in a bunker, the iPad is what Apple describes as a bridge between the world of the smartphone and the laptop — a third ‘mobile’ space that sits between the two. Indeed, at first glance, the iPad looks nothing more than a giant iPhone — it features the same glass multi-touch display (albeit a huge one at 9 1/2 inches), the same buttons – it can even run the same applications.

So many are wondering, well, what’s the difference; “Why do I need one of these shiny new toys when I have an iPhone and a laptop?… I was expecting an all-singing and dancing device that could read my thoughts and intiate command for me on the impulse of a brain wave! …This isn’t the JesusPad I wanted!” Yes, many of these points are true. But what people are forgetting to remember is that content is king, and just like the iPhone and the iPod before it, if the content is good, (in the case of the iPod; huge libaries of mp3’s versus a cd, and the iPhone with the app store full of entertainment and usefulness), then it will be a must-have product.

So let’s look at the killer app, and with a screen this size, it has to be publishing — anything from books to newspapers and magazines. Both Sony and Amazon (with the Kindle) have made significant inroads in to this new area with eBook readers: devices that are like carrying whole libaries in the space of a paperback. But these devices look a generation old compared to the user experience of the iPad – gimicky it may look, but simply turning and flicking a page on the iPad instantly feels more real. The printed book is all good and well, but it’s in the magazine and newspaper area where this product will excel. Take a look at this digital version of the Sports Illustrated magazine and try to say to yourself that you’d rather have a traditional magazine:

It’s been forecast for many years that the ‘death of print’ cometh. Maybe with the iPad and devices like it, we’re at the beginning to this new era. This fuzing of new-media and traditional print publishing into a new and interactive form is going to be exciting for both consumers and designers alike, hopefully reigniting what is a shrinking industry. Take a look at this concept video for a product called Mag+ by Bonnier R&D and their digital design partners BERG – it shows off the potential experience for what a product like the iPad can deliver:

No doubt the iPad will open the flood gates to millions of copycat tablet computers, all hoping to do the same thing. Will I be getting one? Well, I’ve always said; never buy the first gen of any Apple product; but if content as rich as this comes out, I might have to change my mind.

How quickly one can fall from grace.

Last weekend I had to get the train down to the coast once again, so armed with my vouchers from National Express I approached the ticket desk at London Liverpool Street and asked the man (dressed in National Express uniform) behind the counter for a return ticket.

Upon advising him that I was going to be paying with vouchers I was met with a surly sarcastic response about how “oooh, vouchers are our FAVOURITE form of payment”. Confused by his attitude I questioned if he was intending to be sarcastic or not. He replied, in an equally sarcastic tone, “no, of course not, we just LOVE vouchers. Of course come the end of the year the company accounts will be £50 short because of your vouchers so there will undoubtedly be a fare increase next year to cover the loss, but that’s just fine. Thank you.”

*BUMP*

The customer experience of National Express returns to earth with an almighty crash.

The Partners 2003 (top), Paul Rand 1966 (lower)

It was cool to see a discussion about the Ford Oval in the NY Times last week. We were lucky enough to have the chance to update the Ford Oval in 2003 for the centenary of the company. The mark has become symbolic for Ford, with a lot of pride invested in it – they have a saying in Dearborn that true Ford people ‘bleed Ford blue’! It wasn’t an option to do anything as radical as Paul Rand’s job back in the sixties, especially as Ford were struggling financially at the time. We also found that there were hundreds of versions of the oval all around the world (we lost count at 400), so our task was to create one that could be used everywhere. Needless to say the debates about every slight tweak were prolonged, but we were very careful to preserve the character of the ‘original’. The new Oval revealed on top of ford HQ in June 2003 was the first new standard since 1967. That made us proud too.

Some years ago, I treated myself to a Rolex watch with some inheritance money.  I had been working on a project with Rolex shortly before and had somewhat fallen for the allure and myth of the ‘Explorer II’.

As it happens, the oscillator of my Superlative Certified Swiss Chronometer has always exhibited arrhythmia. Over the course of a few days, it will happily gain a couple of minutes but I’ve got used to its idiosyncratic approach to time-telling which for the most part has generally made me slightly more punctual.

Anyway, this isn’t an attempt to deconstruct the rational or irrational behaviour of spending several thousand quid on something that one could spend £5 on and find it does the primary job of telling the time just as well if not better than your average chronometer.

No, this is about the relationship the brand continues to have with you when things go wrong or there is a need for some kind of dialogue. You see, Rolex recommend that the watch is serviced around 5 years mark.  Not that they’ve ever reminded me.  Mine is about 6 years old now but over the Christmas period something inside the stainless steel, expertly crafted one-piece oyster shell of my Explorer II started to vibrate whenever I moved my wrist. And then, just before New Year, the precision-engineered Oyster movement, the ‘height of precision, robustness and guaranteed long term performance’ just kind of….stopped….

So, last weekend I marched into my authorised Rolex agent, expecting staff to jump into action, the watch to be gently but expediently strapped to a watch stretcher, the Rolex helicopter to land  and my watch whisked off for the very best private-care and convalescence before being chauffer driven to my own front door and returned to my wrist in full health a couple of weeks later.

But no. Apparently, I was nonchalently informed, events like this are perfectly usual issues for swiss-engineered superlative chronometers. True or not, the fact that owning the watch might imply I’m a high-octane, adventure fuelled, every second counts kind of guy who relies on their choice of timepiece for accurate split-second, life or death decision-making doesn’t resonate in the quiet corridors and laboratories of Rolex. It would seem there’s no

time like Rolex time. I’ve got to wait between 14 and 16 weeks – yes upto 4 months (or 10,368,000 seconds to be accurate) before I can be repatriated with my son’s heirloom and I’m going to be expected to pay for the pleasure too.

So come on Rolex, if you can’t crank up your servicing mechanisms, surely there is something you could do at this point in the relationship to reaffirm my investment or even better re-ignite my relationship! How about offering a ‘courtesy watch’? Might that not encourage the idea of multiple watch ownership – trialling something a bit sportier or dressier in the interim period?  Oh, and it’s my wife’s 40th birthday just around the corner. But then you didn’t know that did you because you’ve never asked. Tant pis!

A really lovely experience idea from Coca-cola. Just wish they’d been having ideas like this in the days when I was at university.

Via Adland TV

It’s not often that I blog about someone having done something well (I am comfortable in my cranky, critical skin thank you) however I, uncomfortably, find myself in a position where  I genuinely wish to offer praise and ‘props’ to a company have made a good move.

To anyone who’s read my previous posts it will also come as a surprise that I would be praising a rail company, but believe it or not here it comes…

Just before Christmas I had to make an urgent trip from London to Essex. I arrived at Liverpool Street station, checked the departure time of my train, shovelled a big wedge of cash into the ticket machine and just as my tickets printed out the automated departures and arrivals board lit up in a frenzy of flashing lights as one-by-one the trains changed from ‘On Time’ to ‘Cancelled’, ‘Bus Service’ or ‘Delayed’. Mine was cancelled. The tickets, still warm from the printer, cowered in my clenched fist.

I then embarked on the most excruciating train journey of my life. Both the outward and return journeys were subject to cancellations, delays, lack of onboard refreshments due to a broken boiler, overcrowding and general displeasure.

On my return I set about drafting a letter of complaint to the train company responsible, National Express. Seeing as there has been a lot of talk of will they/won’t they mergers with Stagecoach recently I wasn’t holding my breath in getting a positive response to my request for a full, and immediate, refund.

As Christmas set upon us I received a letter from National Express to inform me that they had read my letter and would attempt to come back to me within 6 days. Actually, it was more like 15, but hey, it was Christmas and who’s counting? I was stunned to receive another letter the other day profusely apologising for the ‘unforgiveable’ experience I had had to endure that day on the train, and explaining the reasons for the delays/cancellations but in a tone that was more apologetic and responsible than blame-ridden and bitter. Neatly tucked in the folded letter were vouchers for rail travel (on ANY network in the UK) for not only the full return fare but for the full fare + 25%.

Now, I’m not too sure whether it should be a big cheer for National Express per se, or a big cheer for the cranky insistence of a grump like me, but regardless, I thought the communications tone, and the ‘above and beyond’ value of the vouchers were a great example of a brand’s ability to create a positive experience out of a bad one. Well done National Express.

I just wondered, in the wonderland of Twitter, if there was something deep and meaningful to be said about so many of the 19 million people that watched the X-Factor final last weekend now buying the RATM track. I was puzzling over the schizophrenic relationship people have with the X-Factor brand that makes it, on the one hand, TV’s most compelling event and, on the other, the epitome of the machine against which we are born to rage. Is there a fracture in the joint between a TV show and a personal playlist? Are we so resentful, jealous, or tired of the commercial agenda of Simon Cowell? Followers, I asked, what’s happening here?

The answer from @hjonesy (that’s our Helen) was as profound as it was immediate: it’s a social experiment; something to try to see if it works. And I think she’s hit the nail on the head.  This isn’t about music. This isn’t about the X-Factor, Simon Cowell, wee Joe, or some funny fellas in hoods. It’s about the most seismic shift in consumer behaviour that has happened for a generation, that has started in earnest in 2009.

If there is one thing that we are to remember 2009 for it must be the rise of social media and its ability to empower people, en mass and as individuals, as never before. For providing the opportunity for a single voice to express an opinion and for that opinion to join with others that are similar; growing, developing and coagulating as more and more join in, until their presence can no longer be ignored.  Until their presence is so great that it becomes more significant than the subject that inspired the first voice to be raised. Until the desired and necessary change occurs.

Think Jan Moir. Think Trafigura. Even watch Gordon Brown on TED (no, do). In 2009 we have passed the tipping point at which the balance of power shifts from corporations and institutions (the brands) to the people. It marks the point at which brands have to start to think and operate differently. The point from which no organisation can ever be forgiven for putting itself first and for not taking its responsibilities to its audience, or the wider world, seriously.

Now, the RATM movement isn’t quite the real thing just yet. As Helen says, it’s an experiment rather than a genuine desire for a Christmas No.1 of one type versus another. It’s wrapped up with the irony that the real winner is Sony BMG who have both artists on their label – some will argue that the ‘enemy’ ends up winning after all. But that’s to miss the point. The enemy here isn’t Sony, or Cowell. It’s the old way of doing things. The past. And, in 2009, it’s been defeated.

I’m looking forward to 2010.

Mostly I argue that people are not brands. But in Tiger Woods’ case I make an exception. Because he has gone out of his way to make himself one, and he’s been taking everyone for a fool.

When Tiger Woods made a statement apologising for “not being true to my values” he revealed the depth of his fraud. Just how ‘true’ are those ‘values’, Tiger? Given the extent to which he is now known to have flaunted them, clearly they are not true at all. Tiger, your values are the things that define your behaviour, not the things you think sponsors want to hear. You can’t just say them, you have to live them. If you are consistently doing bad things then you have bad values. Simple as that. When you’re aware of your actions (he wasn’t sleepwalking) to claim your values as anything else is just yet another lie.

Harsh? No. Prior to the scandal in 2001, Enron’s publicly stated values were “communication, respect, integrity, and excellence”. When their deception became apparent their Directors went to jail and corporate accounting practices were changed forever. That’s what can happen when you lie about your values. You might argue that Enron, as a big business, is different. Except that it isn’t. Tiger Woods career earning surpassed the $1 billion mark earlier this year – that’s big business enough. The vast majority of that $1bn is made from sponsorship deals and the size and scope of those deals is, in part at least, based on those same ‘values’ that Tiger claimed to have, but didn’t. The deals get renewed and extended because the public respect Woods for the values he appears to project. Which we now know are a con. Of course in Tiger’s case, he hasn’t broken any laws (apart from a minor traffic offence) so he’s not going to jail. But it’s a form of branded deception nonetheless.

But in the short term, at least, Woods may survive this. His sponsors may be too timid to drop him. But his ‘values’ will be forever changed. If he continues to claim the lie then his appeal to the public and to sponsors will spiral downwards and his longer-term propects are certainly less good. Although were he to be honest at this point and declare his values for that they really are, then perhaps he could even end up prospering even more.

After all, it turns out he’s way more fun than we thought.

I recently had the pleasure of traveling North, and escaping the grime and congestion of London in favour of the…..errrr….grime and congestion of Manchester , in order to go and conduct a client presentation.

Welcome to Manchester

When considering my journey, I flirted with the possibility of traveling first class in order to be able to get some work done. I’ll admit, I was seduced by the idea of a quiet haven where you could focus on your work, undisturbed other than to be offered coffee at your seat, and would generally be made to feel as though you could just get on with being ‘terribly important and busy’.

So, 2 weeks before I was due to travel I popped on to thetrainline.com and looked up times and fares for the date I needed. £66 for an off-peak standard day return. Lovely. Seems reasonable.

My eyes scanned down the page to where the first class fares were listed…

What was that?

Sorry, what was THAT?

£355 for a day return?

Wrestling my eyeballs back into their sockets I began to contemplate what one would get for their £355 ticket. Seeing as I could fly BA (return) to Milan and have a night in a 4-star hotel for the same price, I imagined that a train company commanding the same money must do something pretty special. Do we travel via Capri with a night in a luxury villa, where I’m massaged to within an inch of my life and fed fine cheeses and cured meats until I burst? Do I get to dress in black tie, be drowned in expensive champagne and flirted with by top supermodels for the entire journey whilst, in the background, the London Symphony Orchestra play a collection of my personal favourites? Nope? What do I get then?

A coffee and a newspaper. Fantastic. For the bargain price of £289 I can get some coffee and a newspaper.

I’d be intrigued to have a chat with the head of the particular train company in question and ask him “So, Richard, how do you develop your pricing structure exactly?”

I wonder what the answer would be…

In 2004 Design Week published its annual league table of companies ranked according to the number of design awards they had won worldwide in the previous three years. The Partners was 21st. For some of us here, that was a sobering moment. That’s because this was a league table that through most of the 1990’s had The Partners at its top. So, at that point, it crystallised an ambition that we’ve since been pursuing with relentless intent: regain the creative number one spot.

This week (November 2009) the latest table was published. The Partners is No.1.

Now this blog isn’t a place to be boasting – we’ll do that elsewhere, I’m sure – but we thought it deserved a mention nonetheless.

Thanks to everyone, within and without, who has helped us achieve that. It feels kinda good.

OK, so I say ill-informed as I’m not up to date on the latest UK legislation, my knowledge is a couple of years out of date, so please excuse me if this is utter guff, however something occurred to me on the commute to work this morning…

So yesterday via Twitter I received two identical tweets from the same ‘company’. Being a little more specific, one form the ‘official’ Twitter feed of that company, the other from the ‘personal’ Twitter account of the MD of that company. I say personal, however in the profile he states that he is MD of X…. so in my book, that counts as a representation of that company is a ‘pseudo corporate’ feed. So, two identical tweets, sent from the same ‘company’, to the same individual, me, in the space of a few seconds.

Now if that happened with email, to which I had subscribed, i.e. which is permission based, as is Twitter… I’d be annoyed and think ‘what a stupid company’. Well the same thing happened with those tweets, I thought ‘what a stupid company’. Just because they are short, possibly less intrusive than email, it’s still really dumb to send identical messages over different accounts when you have the same person subscribing to both accounts on the other end! We wouldn’t do that with email would we? And as the business that did this was, surprise surprise, a social media agency (ROFLMAO)… that makes it, as we say on the Internets, an EPIC FAIL.

So, to an extent you have to say ‘bless’, let’s face it a lot of people working in social media, on the face of it, aren’t that experienced in the grand scheme of things, email is for old people right? But more seriously it points to the fact that platforms such as Twitter, even when combined with some of the 3rd party corporate tools, are still massively lacking in maturity and functionality to run at the same level of ‘permission’ and accuracy as email or more traditional direct communications. To my knowledge, (I did say this was ill-informed) no tool exists to manage Twitter subscribes across a companies multiple accounts in the same way as email (i.e. with really thorough, get prosecuted if you mess up, list and subscriber management… yes I get that Twitter is a little less complex in that if you unsubscribe that’s that, to an extent). If it does I get the impression many companies aren’t using it. As far as legislation goes, again I’d welcome an update on this… however, if the law doesn’t hover channels such as Twitter in b2c communications, isn’t it about time it did?

Image taken from www.itsnicethat.com

Whilst on the subject of books (just in time for christmas you might say?), John Sorrell has compiled yet another coffee table book of the most “Inspired Design from Great Britain”, strangely enough entitled: Creative Island II.  There are some quite amazing pieces inside including two from ourselves: The Grand Tour project for the National Gallery and everyone’s favourite sausage, Mr. Singh’s Bangras. There is also some insider insight into how these ideas came to fruition.

On sale on Amazon for £16.97. Bargain.

This week Rockport Publishers sent us a copy of their Really Good Packaging Explained book which is the second in a series following up upon Really Good Logos, Explained. The book showcases the favoured designs of four of the world’s most eminent voices in packaging design. The Partners features in the book a staggering four times with Stanley Honey, Casa Loreto, 96 Degrees Coffee and Mr.Singh’s Bangras. It’s a lovely book to have in your collection, bursting at the seams with excellent examples of packaging design from last few years.

Stanley Honey

Casa Loreto

96 Degrees

Mr Singh's Bangras

This week we were delighted to have Ogilvy supremo Rory Sutherland come in and share his recent TED talk discussing advertising and intangible value. Rather than me spending the next couple of lines wax lyrical about the things he had to say, I thought it would be much better for you to see the talk itself. My best bit? Diamond Shreddies – pure genius.

This week Marketing magazine has published a round-table report on brand loyalty within mobile telecoms providers.

As one of the many slaves to Apple who clamoured for an iPhone as fast as my legs could carry me, I was, once again, forced to sign up with O2 as they held the exclusive contract, with Apple, to supply the iPhone .

I had been a customer of O2 for many years previously (circa 7 or 8 yrs) before I left to join Orange for an 18 month spell. Now, don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t expecting O2 to lay out the proverbial red carpet or even wave a little flag for me upon my return, but part of me did think “A long-term defected customer is returning. What generous offer can you give me to welcome me back?”. The answer to any query I had was a big fat no. I even asked the customer service assistant in the O2 shop when I went to get my iPhone , but I didn’t get anywhere.

They just didn’t care.

They knew that they held the ultimate power in the consumer/service provider face-off. They knew that if I REALLY wanted an iPhone, I would siphon the milk from my (dead) grandmother’s tea in order to get my hands on one if need be. They didn’t need to offer me anything as a returning customer, they had me right where they wanted me (aka: signing my life away on a binding contract for an exorbitant monthly fee).

Then after the first few months of waving my iPhone around in the faces of those stuck in contracts with other providers, Vodafone and Orange announce within 48 hours of each other that they are also going to be supplying the iPhone in due course.

I quickly glanced at my phone in anticipation of a call from O2 for some serious ’stroking’ and offers of a plentiful bounty of treats were I to stay with them and not defect, once more, to Orange or Vodafone. But that call didn’t come…and it still hasn’t. I doubt it ever will.

It strikes me, as a mobile phone user, that the service provider brands just seem to have given up the ghost in terms of wanting to create, and more importantly maintain, brand loyalty. It’s less about the service they provide now and more about the products they supply us with. They are a vehicle for the phones to market, and no more.

Sure, their advertising might be really appealing and their brand may ‘look’ glossy and attractive, but that’s really where their ‘brand’, as an experience, seems to end. Mobile service providers have become like commodities these days. They’re no longer chosen based on the strength of their brand, or how great their customer service is. They are chosen based on two factors:

1. Do they provide the phone I want?

2. Are they the cheapest?

I would like (and expect) more for my money. O2, you need to start seeing me as a ‘valued customer’ as opposed to just a standing order sum being deposited into your account each month. If not, my iPhone and I will be taking a walk down the road to Vodafone or Orange. Frying pan – fire? Maybe…I challenge you to make me change my mind.