Archive for March, 2008
Thursday, March 13th, 2008
The Other Waterboarding
More news from the sick-ass “cause marketing” front:
Over a billion people in the world are lucky if they are able to drink from fetid puddles, and the “water crisis” is projected to continue rapidly worsening.
This, of course, is a consequence of the plague of extreme poverty and rapid consequent population growth that capitalism has created and proven incapable of solving.
So, how do our beloved corporate marketers react when they catch wind of the human consequences?
Listen to Peter Thum explain the transcendent effect:
I spent a lot of time around people who didn’t have access to clean drinking water. Following that, I consulted on a project in the bottled-water industry, and I realized that there was an opportunity to create a brand that people really cared about.
Yes, friends, a worldwide scourge that kills more people than AIDs and engenders untold misery leads, in the corporate capitalist world, to a new marketing opportunity!
And where is this opportunity? Is the main activity of the new “brand” going to be passing out free super-straws like the one above?
Are you kidding? Where’s the cash in that?
Instead, what the lucky billion dying of thirst in the Third World are going to get from this new corporate marketing effort is the privilege of having Americans buy Ethos, a new brand of — you guessed it — water bottled in plastic and sold in the US for $1.85!
The basic financial math of this wondrous breakthrough in human care and concern? Mr. Thum and his co-founder of Ethos recently sold their new “brand” to the Starbucks corporation, which has now cut Pepsico in on this “cause marketing” action, for $8 million. Their “goal” — not their promise — is to donate $10 million to some unspecified lucky folks among those billion thirsty beneficiaries by 2010.
Yet, since only a nickel from each sale goes in that fund, that means there must be 200 million new bottles of Ethos sold in order for this “goal” to obtain.
And, even as it increased the cash flows to long-suffering Starbucks and Pepsico shareholders, what would that alleged $10 million provide for 1 billion people? A penny apiece.
Who would ever argue that the co-founders of this jubilee might not deserve their $4-million payments (plus forthcoming dividends from retained shares) for creating such a wondrous, efficient, and eco-friendly arrangement?
Friday, March 7th, 2008
Another Country Heard From
Interesting how quickly somebody from pg.com commented on the last post. The comment? “Interesting perspective.” On the very tiny chance the whole thing isn’t just a web-bot branch of Procter & Gamble’s “intelligence”-gathering/critic-suppression operation, my reply is: Yes, the truth must seem like merely an “interesting perspective” to you professional liars.
Now, let’s see if this post draws the same robotic reply…
Wednesday, March 5th, 2008
The Genesis of Nine-Dollar Anti-Perspirant
The Procter & Gamble corporation has recently introduced “Secret Clinical Strength” anti-perspirant, which retails for $8.99.
This capitalist’s wet dream is a microcosm of big business marketing’s essential wastefulness and fraudulence:
Marketing Research: This blatantly undemanded and unneeded product undoubtedly had its origins in weaknesses and fears P&G marketers discovered, at great labor and expense, in focus groups.
Public Relations: After discovering these trivial fears and weaknesses, P&G launched a fake “non-profit foundation” to medicalize the fear of excessive sweating. This “foundation” is the International Hyperhidrosis Society, launched in 2004 with a budget of $945,000 and headed by one of P&G’s former marketing consultants.
And, hey, campers! Guess which product has just won the IHHS’s very first “Seal of Recognition”?
Packaging: While blitzing the public with claims about its alleged concern for the environment, P&G’s wondrous new anti-perspirant also speaks volumes about the huge percentage of corporate packaging that literally serves no purpose beyond marketing trickery. As Advertising Age for March 3 reports:
Most marketers have tales to tell about ingenious ways they’ve saved the planet by reducing packaging.
So why is the hottest segment in deodorants sold in paper cartons that never existed until about a year ago and seem to serve little purpose?
It’s all about justifying that $7 [sic] and up for “clinical strength” antiperspirants, which cost more than double the $2 or $3 for a regular stick of antiperspirant.
“It would appear that the outer carton signals the idea of clinical, high-performance products,” said Kevin Havelock, president of Unilever U.S. A P&G spokesman said: “It serves as the extra real estate to get [consumers] the information we think they need.”
It’s worked well. The Secret product racked up $46.6 million in sales through the 52 weeks ended Jan. 27, according to IRI, and accounted for all of P&G’s 3.1-point share gain.
Unilever’s Degree and P&G’s Gillette followed with their own versions. P&G then rolled an Old Spice clinical product in February. All in boxes.
But all those boxes take a toll. The Dogwood Alliance recently reported that 25% of trees cut down in the Southeastern U.S. each year are for product packaging.
