Bloom Consulting is a firm which specialises in nation and place branding. Headquartered in Madrid, it has worked with that city's tourism authority and others, such as Germany's, Sweden's, Austria's and Malta's. So it is probably in a position to be able to judge how countries stack up in terms of their tourism branding, which is precisely what it does. At the top of the list is the USA. Spain is second.
As part of this overview of national branding, there is a look at the slogans that are used. The world's number two nation - Spain - has a well enough known slogan: "I Need Spain". One says it's well enough known, but by whom would be the question. One might suggest that those in the know, e.g. consultants, are rather more familiar with it than the general tourism public. And how meaningful is it to that public? The traveller may need Spain, but he or she is probably after something rather more specific that conveys the Spanish brand's enormous diversity.
The slogans, it is said, capture the essence of countries in a few words. Does "I Need Spain" capture the essence? Well, does it? You tell me, but all it says to me is that I'm supposed to need the country. This said, "need" is a powerful word, so perhaps it does capture an essence. But what about some others? "Welcome to Great Britain"? This is a slogan? "Cameroon is back"? Back from where? "Go to Hungary"? Why?
Adopting adjectives such as "wonderful" (Indonesia), "incredible" (India), "sensational" (Brazil) is a common ploy, and all the more meaningless for being so, though it might be said that each of these nations is still emerging in terms of global tourism. The single adjective may therefore be sufficient, as what is being branded and sold is a national tourism that hasn't begun to reach a mature phase.
This is different in the case of Spain, where familiarity and maturity are such that there needs to be a constant re-evaluation of the message but, more importantly, messages that convey diversity. In Spanish terms, what do the Balearics have in common with Extremadura? Even more locally, what does Palma have in common with Capdepera? Or Soller with Santanyi?
If slogans are deemed to be so important, then where are they? Indeed, where is the overall branding? Palma is an obvious exception, though even here I would seriously question what influence the "Passion for ..." motif has had. It seems more a by-product of the branding rather than central to it.
There are some slogans knocking around. "Experience Alcudia", "Arta surprises" (the noun rather than the verb), "Pollensa, a place with stories to tell" (quite good actually). But do they lodge in the visitor's memory or make a scrap of difference when it comes to choosing a destination?
Returning to the nations' slogans, there is one that stands out for the message behind the message. Colombia's is "the only risk is wanting to stay", a sure recognition of past safety issues. Arguably, a negative connotation should be avoided, but the Colombia slogan may well hint at ways forward for destinations bedevilled by problems.
Although Mallorca doesn't have the problems that others do, it does have the issue of the anti-slogan (the one that finds its way onto walls in Palma). While this has been downplayed as the acts of a few (if that) and as an expression of a small minority, I'm unconvinced. In the days before social media and online commenting, I would have been, but not now. Anti-tourist sentiment is such that a front cover of the "Majorca Daily Bulletin" found its way onto the Terraferida Facebook page the other day: "Welcome to the new Magalluf", and a lament at the start of work on the new Hotel Jamaica and the golf fair.
On the "Ultima Hora" website not so long ago, someone mentioned the slogan "un turista, un amigo" in challenging a host of comments supportive of anti-tourist sentiment. There have been attempts to revive this old slogan, which was memorable enough. The Bauzá government said it would, but then didn't. In 2002, the town hall in Palma had intended investing in it as means of highlighting the social welfare from tourism and so as a way of countering negative sentiment. And in 2003 there was another slogan, this one from the regional ministry of environment - "Mallorca - sí al turismo sostenible!"
While there are numerous slogans that mean virtually nothing, others can mean a great deal. "A tourist, a friend" would now sound desperate, but it (or something by way of an alternative) has the power of addressing different audiences, such as the general public, a target, according to Bloom, under the heading of "admiration".
Slogans are very much more than simple adjectives. They need meaning and not just meaning for one audience. Now, more than ever.
Showing posts with label Brands. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brands. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
In Search Of Brand Mallorca
Mallorca has some pretty serious brands. To Marriott and Hilton are being added Hyatt and Virgin. What do these have in common? Apart from all being in the hotel business (which will be the case with Virgin), they are all foreign. Moreover, they are global brands. Their recognition takes them around the world.
The strength of a brand doesn't happen by accident. It isn't solely an achievement of clever marketers. There has to be considerable substance for a brand to be imbued with the consumer confidence and trust that stem from this recognition. And this substance is created by doing things well and innovatively: even the comparatively small things. Take Marriott, for example. With its acquisition of Starwood, it is poised to become the world's largest hotel concern. A giant of the travel and tourism industry, I can recall how - many years ago now - Marriott was pioneering the use of what would nowadays be referred to as to the exploitation of Big Data. Its innovation in data capture was such that it created personalised attention. The collection of client preferences was stored and then shaped into what would be presented to the client on his or her next stay.
Such detail, such service is what goes towards the establishment of the attributes that mark a great brand out from others. Too often, or so it can appear, it is the visuals of the brand that are believed to suffice. They do not; it is what lies behind the hotel facades, logos and advertising messages that matter.
Virgin is a very different case. It is a peculiar organisation in that it appears to be a vast conglomerate chewing away at more or less every available sector going. And yet its style has always been essentially decentralised. It is more like a franchise system, unified under a brand name that carries with it values that inspire confidence, rather than one massive and faceless entity.
To no small extent, the Virgin brand is an abstraction from the attributes assigned to its founder, but it would not have succeeded in the way that it has if these were all that it relied upon, and a clue to that success might be found in one word that Richard Branson has uttered in respect of ambitions for the Son Bunyola hotel: "best".
It might seem simplistic, but an aspiration for being the "best" is what impels businesses to seek and to attain brand superiority. The whole structure is designed with being the best or the best possible. And with this being-the-best come the ultimate aims of branding - customer loyalty and trust as well as profit, recognition and/or market leadership.
For all the success of Mallorca's home-grown, global hotel companies, none of them possess the same brand powers as a Marriott, a Hyatt, a Hilton or a Virgin. Up to a point, this is a question of scale. Meliá, as an example, may be big but it is dwarfed by others. But it, as with other Mallorcan hotel companies, were slow to appreciate the benefits of strong branding. This isn't just me saying so, they've all pretty much admitted as such.
As they play catch-up, and none better than Meliá, what might this mean for Mallorca? Superior brands of ever greater recognition, they should, they will have a rub-off effect on the island. But to what degree might these major hotel chains create a type of de facto brand for Mallorca? One that is cast in their collective image, this collective being a combination of the home-grown, leading hotel chains and the foreign ones, to which other names and brands - from the Middle and Far East - will follow.
Gabriel Escarrer of Meliá has spoken of the need for Mallorca and the Balearics to become an "elite" destination. This is one in which the global, "best" brands will succeed, but is it this process of re-branding that inspires so much resentment among some politicians and, so it would seem, the public at large? When Alberto Jarabo of Podemos opined that the hoteliers act against the best interests of Mallorca, a staggering 80%-plus agreed with him (according to one survey).
The politics of current tourism harbour philosophies opposed to fundamentals of strong branding. For Podemos, "sun and beach" is obsolete, when it is Mallorca's primary brand attribute. The tourist tax does nothing for loyalty developed over decades. Neither of these envisages a strategic vision of Mallorca as "best", only Mallorca as defined by specific political interests. The hoteliers, meanwhile, disconnected from this political process, follow their branding initiatives which ultimately make the island secondary: it is the brand and the loyalty to it which matters and not the destination.
Who will step up and argue for brand Mallorca? Perhaps no one, because while such tensions exist, there can never be a unified brand. Someone should talk to Branson.
The strength of a brand doesn't happen by accident. It isn't solely an achievement of clever marketers. There has to be considerable substance for a brand to be imbued with the consumer confidence and trust that stem from this recognition. And this substance is created by doing things well and innovatively: even the comparatively small things. Take Marriott, for example. With its acquisition of Starwood, it is poised to become the world's largest hotel concern. A giant of the travel and tourism industry, I can recall how - many years ago now - Marriott was pioneering the use of what would nowadays be referred to as to the exploitation of Big Data. Its innovation in data capture was such that it created personalised attention. The collection of client preferences was stored and then shaped into what would be presented to the client on his or her next stay.
Such detail, such service is what goes towards the establishment of the attributes that mark a great brand out from others. Too often, or so it can appear, it is the visuals of the brand that are believed to suffice. They do not; it is what lies behind the hotel facades, logos and advertising messages that matter.
Virgin is a very different case. It is a peculiar organisation in that it appears to be a vast conglomerate chewing away at more or less every available sector going. And yet its style has always been essentially decentralised. It is more like a franchise system, unified under a brand name that carries with it values that inspire confidence, rather than one massive and faceless entity.
To no small extent, the Virgin brand is an abstraction from the attributes assigned to its founder, but it would not have succeeded in the way that it has if these were all that it relied upon, and a clue to that success might be found in one word that Richard Branson has uttered in respect of ambitions for the Son Bunyola hotel: "best".
It might seem simplistic, but an aspiration for being the "best" is what impels businesses to seek and to attain brand superiority. The whole structure is designed with being the best or the best possible. And with this being-the-best come the ultimate aims of branding - customer loyalty and trust as well as profit, recognition and/or market leadership.
For all the success of Mallorca's home-grown, global hotel companies, none of them possess the same brand powers as a Marriott, a Hyatt, a Hilton or a Virgin. Up to a point, this is a question of scale. Meliá, as an example, may be big but it is dwarfed by others. But it, as with other Mallorcan hotel companies, were slow to appreciate the benefits of strong branding. This isn't just me saying so, they've all pretty much admitted as such.
As they play catch-up, and none better than Meliá, what might this mean for Mallorca? Superior brands of ever greater recognition, they should, they will have a rub-off effect on the island. But to what degree might these major hotel chains create a type of de facto brand for Mallorca? One that is cast in their collective image, this collective being a combination of the home-grown, leading hotel chains and the foreign ones, to which other names and brands - from the Middle and Far East - will follow.
Gabriel Escarrer of Meliá has spoken of the need for Mallorca and the Balearics to become an "elite" destination. This is one in which the global, "best" brands will succeed, but is it this process of re-branding that inspires so much resentment among some politicians and, so it would seem, the public at large? When Alberto Jarabo of Podemos opined that the hoteliers act against the best interests of Mallorca, a staggering 80%-plus agreed with him (according to one survey).
The politics of current tourism harbour philosophies opposed to fundamentals of strong branding. For Podemos, "sun and beach" is obsolete, when it is Mallorca's primary brand attribute. The tourist tax does nothing for loyalty developed over decades. Neither of these envisages a strategic vision of Mallorca as "best", only Mallorca as defined by specific political interests. The hoteliers, meanwhile, disconnected from this political process, follow their branding initiatives which ultimately make the island secondary: it is the brand and the loyalty to it which matters and not the destination.
Who will step up and argue for brand Mallorca? Perhaps no one, because while such tensions exist, there can never be a unified brand. Someone should talk to Branson.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Defending Loyalty To Mallorca
April Rinne is a name that probably won't mean anything to you. She is the chief strategy officer for something called Collaborative Lab, "the leading source of expertise for companies and governments that want to embrace the collaborative economy". Among other things, she is a "young global leader" at the World Economic Forum and has been an adviser to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. She has, says her biog, "illustrated her thought leadership" in various publications. Thought leadership? What on earth is that?
Depending on your perspective, Rinne is either one of those infuriating Americans who come along on a regular basis and appear to invent entire alternative universes of business and marketing replete with jargonese and gurudom or a crystal-clear visionary of a brave new future world. Whatever your perspective, these are universes or worlds remote from the man or woman booking holidays to Mallorca. They appear divorced from everyday realities but sometimes they can be important, and what April Rinne deals in is important.
The notion of the collaborative or sharing economy is simple enough. You have something to share - let's say it's an apartment that you own - and someone wants to take up your offer. This is an economy that has always been with us, but technology has vastly expanded its potential, so much so that - at its most extreme -what you might have to share can be shared with anyone from anywhere. Middlemen cease to exist. All that is needed is a facilitator, a third party which enables the sharer to be in touch with his or her potential market. This is the world of P2P, peer to peer or people to people. This is the world of Airbnb property sharing, Uber car sharing and many others.
Rinne has made an observation which sums up the rise of P2P. It has taken Airbnb, the world's leading internet portal for tourist property rental, just six years to reach a level of users (customers) that Hilton needed over 90 years to attain. It is a stark observation of the battle between hotels and private accommodation that is going on across the globe and so not just in Mallorca, and it is a battle which, despite moves to legislate, appears to be one that the hotels cannot win. Rinne believes that the onslaught from the likes of Airbnb has only just begun.
Confronted with this competition - typically decried by the hoteliers as "unfair" - how can hotels fight back? A clue as to how they can lies with understanding the appeal of P2P and the apparent shifts in consumer thinking and behaviour, in particular those of the so-called Millennial generation. Tourism, according to accepted P2P wisdom, is about personalisation, about "experiences", about contact with local people in destinations. It is the depersonalised nature of hotels which turns the traveller on to a P2P "experience" and which also deters those Millennials who supposedly are also interested principally in experiences.
Of course, much of this sounds and often is marketing gobbledegook, but there is nevertheless a good deal of truth about depersonalisation and especially that which comes with the package holiday. This said, hotels have woken up to the need for greater personalisation and also to the need for "experiences". Many can't help telling potential clients about the experiences that await them or shoehorning them in to brand sloganising. And it is this branding which holds the key for hotels and, more importantly, tour operators.
Experiences and personalisation have become the hotelier and tour operator zeitgeist as has the need for branding and so brand loyalty, but in emphasising the brand, tour operators and indeed some hotel chains shift the focus away from the destination. What is being sold, therefore, is the brand, and where it is located is secondary. A consequence is that loyalty to the destination, be it Mallorca, its individual resorts is potentially loosened. And experiences and personalisation for the P2P traveller can also undermine specific destinations. These travellers place a premium on the social-media aspect of sharing information and recommendations. If they are for somewhere other than Mallorca, then so be it.
The importance of these trends can be over-exaggerated. The traditional package holiday, for instance, and despite repeated reports of its death, is not about to disappear any time soon. But they are trends which cannot be ignored and so make it imperative that Mallorca acts to confirm and reinforce tourist loyalty to it.
There was a statement the other day that the "summer sells itself". Well yes, it does, but to believe, against the background of these trends, that "selling" is not required is wrongheaded. It is needed as never before, and so Mallorca needs its own assault, one it is currently failing to deliver, that of loyalty building through social media. And, moreover, it is an assault that needs to embrace, not deny, the P2P revolution.
Depending on your perspective, Rinne is either one of those infuriating Americans who come along on a regular basis and appear to invent entire alternative universes of business and marketing replete with jargonese and gurudom or a crystal-clear visionary of a brave new future world. Whatever your perspective, these are universes or worlds remote from the man or woman booking holidays to Mallorca. They appear divorced from everyday realities but sometimes they can be important, and what April Rinne deals in is important.
The notion of the collaborative or sharing economy is simple enough. You have something to share - let's say it's an apartment that you own - and someone wants to take up your offer. This is an economy that has always been with us, but technology has vastly expanded its potential, so much so that - at its most extreme -what you might have to share can be shared with anyone from anywhere. Middlemen cease to exist. All that is needed is a facilitator, a third party which enables the sharer to be in touch with his or her potential market. This is the world of P2P, peer to peer or people to people. This is the world of Airbnb property sharing, Uber car sharing and many others.
Rinne has made an observation which sums up the rise of P2P. It has taken Airbnb, the world's leading internet portal for tourist property rental, just six years to reach a level of users (customers) that Hilton needed over 90 years to attain. It is a stark observation of the battle between hotels and private accommodation that is going on across the globe and so not just in Mallorca, and it is a battle which, despite moves to legislate, appears to be one that the hotels cannot win. Rinne believes that the onslaught from the likes of Airbnb has only just begun.
Confronted with this competition - typically decried by the hoteliers as "unfair" - how can hotels fight back? A clue as to how they can lies with understanding the appeal of P2P and the apparent shifts in consumer thinking and behaviour, in particular those of the so-called Millennial generation. Tourism, according to accepted P2P wisdom, is about personalisation, about "experiences", about contact with local people in destinations. It is the depersonalised nature of hotels which turns the traveller on to a P2P "experience" and which also deters those Millennials who supposedly are also interested principally in experiences.
Of course, much of this sounds and often is marketing gobbledegook, but there is nevertheless a good deal of truth about depersonalisation and especially that which comes with the package holiday. This said, hotels have woken up to the need for greater personalisation and also to the need for "experiences". Many can't help telling potential clients about the experiences that await them or shoehorning them in to brand sloganising. And it is this branding which holds the key for hotels and, more importantly, tour operators.
Experiences and personalisation have become the hotelier and tour operator zeitgeist as has the need for branding and so brand loyalty, but in emphasising the brand, tour operators and indeed some hotel chains shift the focus away from the destination. What is being sold, therefore, is the brand, and where it is located is secondary. A consequence is that loyalty to the destination, be it Mallorca, its individual resorts is potentially loosened. And experiences and personalisation for the P2P traveller can also undermine specific destinations. These travellers place a premium on the social-media aspect of sharing information and recommendations. If they are for somewhere other than Mallorca, then so be it.
The importance of these trends can be over-exaggerated. The traditional package holiday, for instance, and despite repeated reports of its death, is not about to disappear any time soon. But they are trends which cannot be ignored and so make it imperative that Mallorca acts to confirm and reinforce tourist loyalty to it.
There was a statement the other day that the "summer sells itself". Well yes, it does, but to believe, against the background of these trends, that "selling" is not required is wrongheaded. It is needed as never before, and so Mallorca needs its own assault, one it is currently failing to deliver, that of loyalty building through social media. And, moreover, it is an assault that needs to embrace, not deny, the P2P revolution.
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
Pep Talk: Intellectual property
It is a case from the mid-1980s I remember well. It was concerned with the notion of passing off, in this instance the use of a trademark considered to be similar to that of another business. The two protagonists were Laura Ashley and the wallpaper/home furnishings company Coloroll. The latter had developed a range of wallpapers that had a similar look to Laura Ashley's. This wasn't really the problem; the logo was. Coloroll's logo looked not unlike Laura Ashley's. It was an oval and had a sort of flowery arrangement inside it. So did Laura Ashley's. Whether consumers were inclined to think that there was some association between the two businesses is doubtful, but this wasn't of course the point; Laura Ashley's intellectual property and the goodwill and attributes of its brand were.
There is a very well-known global restaurant brand which has an establishment in Palma. Away from the capital, there is - or was - a restaurant that isn't globally known. Its name was very similar. Its logo was pretty much identical to the globally known brand. There was an application to register this as a trademark, which was seemingly and probably unsurprisingly opposed. Nevertheless, the restaurant with the similar name and logo operated for a season before changing the name the following season. The logo also changed, but not to the extent that this prevented a reviewer on Trip Advisor from still being able to comment on the similarity with a famous chain of restaurants.
The restaurant with the similar name and logo appears to be no more. At any rate, when I passed by the other day the sign was down and the "local" appeared to have been cleared. If it is no more, then it is a bit of a shame. It wasn't bad, and for the most part reviews on Trip Advisor agreed that it wasn't bad. But one does have to ask why it was felt necessary to apparently wish to imitate a very well-known restaurant. Surely some form of challenge had to be expected, which at best might mean having to go the trouble and cost of changing signs, menus etc. At worst, it might mean far more. Were the punters likely to have thought that there was a genuine association with the well-known brand? Probably not. In which case, why bother?
In Tenerife, lawyers acting for Gordon Ramsay are trying to find ways of dealing with a restaurant in Puerto Colon which has been trading by the name "Gordon Ransay's" for the past four years or so. You would think that, despite the alteration of one letter in the name, this is a clear infringement of intellectual property. Even with this one letter change, the script style of the restaurant's name could lead one to read it as "Ramsay", while the "R" is not a million miles away from the "R" that is in Ramsay's signature trademark. To make matters worse, this particular restaurant gets some rotten reviews. Ramsay has every right to be furious and to be frustrated by the difficulties encountered in tackling this apparent passing off.
Andema is the national association for the defence of trademarks and brands. Its director-general said recently that Mallorca and the Canaries were "black spots" for trademark falsification. He was speaking in the context of a product counterfeiting case involving a Chinese retailer who had been fined a mere 240 euros for selling a bag with the Louis Vuitton name. The reason for the low fine was that, though the retailer had acquired 1,075 pirated Vuitton bags, 1,074 of them were in a warehouse. Only one had been in the store.
Whether counterfeiting or passing off, the principle is the same; there is an attack on intellectual property, and I imagine most of us will be fully aware of the counterfeiting that exists in Mallorca. No one is really duped into believing they're buying the genuine item (or at least you would hope they aren't), and while it might seem fairly innocuous to buy some fake sunglasses or what have you, the scale of the counterfeiting is anything but innocuous.
A national law of 2001 was designed to help protect large and well-known brands from infringements. How well it is being applied is perhaps a question that Gordon Ramsay might like an answer to, but there may nevertheless be a danger that it goes too far in undermining efforts of local entrepreneurs, such as those behind the successful Lemon Factory, makers of Pep Lemon. While the process of a challenge by Pepsi to its Pep Cola is ongoing, the company is marketing it simply as "Pep". There may be some similarity, but as everyone knows, Pep is a common name in Mallorca. Would anyone seriously mistake a Pep Cola for a Pepsi? No, but then such is the way with intellectual property.
There is a very well-known global restaurant brand which has an establishment in Palma. Away from the capital, there is - or was - a restaurant that isn't globally known. Its name was very similar. Its logo was pretty much identical to the globally known brand. There was an application to register this as a trademark, which was seemingly and probably unsurprisingly opposed. Nevertheless, the restaurant with the similar name and logo operated for a season before changing the name the following season. The logo also changed, but not to the extent that this prevented a reviewer on Trip Advisor from still being able to comment on the similarity with a famous chain of restaurants.
The restaurant with the similar name and logo appears to be no more. At any rate, when I passed by the other day the sign was down and the "local" appeared to have been cleared. If it is no more, then it is a bit of a shame. It wasn't bad, and for the most part reviews on Trip Advisor agreed that it wasn't bad. But one does have to ask why it was felt necessary to apparently wish to imitate a very well-known restaurant. Surely some form of challenge had to be expected, which at best might mean having to go the trouble and cost of changing signs, menus etc. At worst, it might mean far more. Were the punters likely to have thought that there was a genuine association with the well-known brand? Probably not. In which case, why bother?
In Tenerife, lawyers acting for Gordon Ramsay are trying to find ways of dealing with a restaurant in Puerto Colon which has been trading by the name "Gordon Ransay's" for the past four years or so. You would think that, despite the alteration of one letter in the name, this is a clear infringement of intellectual property. Even with this one letter change, the script style of the restaurant's name could lead one to read it as "Ramsay", while the "R" is not a million miles away from the "R" that is in Ramsay's signature trademark. To make matters worse, this particular restaurant gets some rotten reviews. Ramsay has every right to be furious and to be frustrated by the difficulties encountered in tackling this apparent passing off.
Andema is the national association for the defence of trademarks and brands. Its director-general said recently that Mallorca and the Canaries were "black spots" for trademark falsification. He was speaking in the context of a product counterfeiting case involving a Chinese retailer who had been fined a mere 240 euros for selling a bag with the Louis Vuitton name. The reason for the low fine was that, though the retailer had acquired 1,075 pirated Vuitton bags, 1,074 of them were in a warehouse. Only one had been in the store.
Whether counterfeiting or passing off, the principle is the same; there is an attack on intellectual property, and I imagine most of us will be fully aware of the counterfeiting that exists in Mallorca. No one is really duped into believing they're buying the genuine item (or at least you would hope they aren't), and while it might seem fairly innocuous to buy some fake sunglasses or what have you, the scale of the counterfeiting is anything but innocuous.
A national law of 2001 was designed to help protect large and well-known brands from infringements. How well it is being applied is perhaps a question that Gordon Ramsay might like an answer to, but there may nevertheless be a danger that it goes too far in undermining efforts of local entrepreneurs, such as those behind the successful Lemon Factory, makers of Pep Lemon. While the process of a challenge by Pepsi to its Pep Cola is ongoing, the company is marketing it simply as "Pep". There may be some similarity, but as everyone knows, Pep is a common name in Mallorca. Would anyone seriously mistake a Pep Cola for a Pepsi? No, but then such is the way with intellectual property.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
