Great marketing versus stupendously bad marketing

Good marketing

A good marketing campaign begins by understanding what you’re trying to achieve. It helps define who you are, what you stand for and how your brand should be perceived.

Marketing helps you shape your image; or that of your product or service.

Marketing analyzes need. Uncovers issues, problems and reveals desire. A successful campaign will define these for the consumer. And position the features, benefits and advantages of their product or service accordingly.

Successful marketing results when all the components are attended too and aligned. The copy. Placement of copy. The font. Colors. The offer. The medium. Everything.  And portrays you in a positive light.

A smart marketer tests for results before releasing anything to the public.

Stupendously bad marketing

Based on these things that I hold true, this campaign below, which ended up in my mailbox on Saturday, is a total failure. I searched the alphabet for a grade. I settled on a Z-.

The thrust of this campaign attempts to:

• Promote the joining of an unknown individual to a local brokerage
• Create interest by leveraging a canine with an odd name and a weird spot
• Build personal brand through a list of generalities
• Incur leads through a passive call to action.

Here’s why it fails.

The campaign is confusing. At first glance you might think its an ad for a lost dog. From the neighborhood does little to position it and begs the question what neighborhood?  It suggests it’s a boilerplate promotion. Random rather than targeted. Sent to any or every neighborhood.

I have joined Patterson Realty evokes a “who gives a shit” response. It does not address any real issue, need or desire. Unless I’m mistaken no one around my hood is sitting on the edge of their seats monitoring Patterson Realty’s recruits.

The elephant in the room is of course the schnauzer. He’s been infused deeply into Irene’s brand. Her value proposition, her ideals, everything she wants us to understand about her is wrapped up in an animal named Chester. Target did it with Target. RCA Victor did it with Nipper. Irene is neither.

The Patterson Realty brokerage brand has been applied indicating some level of participation and/or association with Irene and Chester. Whatever impression people have of these two will be assigned to Patterson. If that impression is positive, great for Patterson. If it’s negative…

Contacting Irene and Chester is offered through cell or email referencing two of the least favorable ways to communicate with agents today and the ones most often cited as resulting in longest response times.

Her claims are unsubstantiated. In today’s world, when you position yourself as trustworthy, knowledgeable and ethical you better be prepared to sling proof. Stat.

If a proper marketing strategy were in place, the following results might indicate that:

• The agent is brand new
• She is self-absorbed
• She possess minimal qualifications
• She is technologically inept
• She is socially inept
• Too cheap to buy a website
• Does not possess the skill to market a home
• Is not from the neighborhood
• Has a broker who shares in everything listed above

Have I missed anything here?

What I would have her do instead Here’s a short list.

• Build a nice website on WP and tie a blog to it
• Set up a Twitter account. Search local users. Follow them. Start conversations
• Take photos of the neighborhoods and create profiles for them on Flickr
• Set up a Facebook page for the personal brand
• Set up a Facebook Fan page for the business brand
• Get market data Put context to it. Publish it every week
• Follow Chester’s natural instincts and mark territory digitally. Write on peoples wall. Infuse yourself into conversations. Leave comments.

I’m not blind. This postcard campaign could result in a lead. And reward Irene and Chester with a listing. But that’s a considerably unbalanced trade off for the negative impression this stands to inflict on their emerging brand. It’s a foolhardy marketing choice, born out of laziness, misinformation and misdirection.

I don’t blame Irene. Or Chester. They are obviously new to real estate. Someone advised them to do this. Her broker. The marketing director. Perhaps an area coach. Who are those people?

In consideration of the benefits now being realized by progressive agents who understand good marketing and employ them properly, I stand firm in my conviction. This stuff has got to go.

– Davison Twitter: 1000wattmarcFacebook: Become a fan