Comments on: buying space in someone else’s brain is far harder than buying space in someone else’s media

By: Chris Houchens

Chris Houchens — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 12:16:30 +0000

I've been saying it forever - http://shotgunconcepts.blogspot.com/2006/06/marketing-startup.html

By: Clive Birnie

Clive Birnie — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 03:23:37 +0000

"buying space in someone else's brain is far harder than buying space in someone else's media". Quote of the week. But wasn't it ever thus? I recall "share of mind" discussions 15 years back. The point for me is that "buying" media space was (and lets be clear ,still is) the dominant method by which a desire for share of mind was communicated. Shouting down the megaphone media narrow. Before mass media advertising word of mouth, peer recommendation, the advice of your friendly local shopkeeper were the unmeasured norm. Being in business with a product to sell was marketing. For me this has not changed. Business is marketing and marketing is business.

By: Paul Fabretti

Paul Fabretti — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:46:31 +0000

Funny how big agencies “get it” now.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:50:03 +0000

Hugh, I just finished a 3-day conference for innkeepeers where marketing is one of the key topics ("how do I get my 8-room B&B known to the world?"). Some attended the session Steve and I presented on innkeepers with blogs, so some of them will undoubtedly visit your site. For us, reading marketing and business blogs is darn hard--the content and concepts are far removed from what we do every day. But I hope they persevere and mine those gems from your posts, like "buying space in someone else's brain..." to me means creating such impressive quality and customer service that it would entice a guest to choose a small property over a traditional hotel; and Rik's reply that "marketing should be built into your product from the start." The trick for us is remembering these gems as we're cleaning a stained carpet or doing that 12th load of laundry, so keep 'em coming.

By: robert

robert — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:49:23 +0000

yes, I must say that my initial reaction was; “duh!“
creating a product, or “offering something useful” to a “community” is the definition of marketing.
If what you are saying is that companies ought to invest in marketing and not advertising, then I agree. But this is not a Web 2.0, new-meeja, “future of adverising”, etc. issue. They spotted a need and created a product to satisfy it, profitably. Marketing job done. The proper job of advertising is to get the word out, not to create the ‘need’.
I agree with your headline, but is this not simply an old fashioned argument for ‘proper’ marketing and against advertising?
The real web twist here is how Nike (or any other company) can use the web, blogosphere, etc. to get feedback on what people ‘need’ today, and to create products to match that.

By: Dr Snowboard

Dr Snowboard — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:41:38 +0000

‘which has virtually transformed running’…nothing like good old-fashioned hyperbole.

By: Kimber

Kimber — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:10:01 +0000

Not a fan of the c word. A bit too crass for me. But it does make an impact.
Companies are moving towards comprehensive media plans. Advertising, promotion, pr, via every medium from one source. Takes the co-ordination headaches away. So if their current providers can’t offer all that…

By: Nathan

Nathan — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:07:17 +0000

Given the last quote about building marketing into products from the start– of which I wholly agree with– what of companies that got off on the wrong foot, so to speak? Those that didn’t integrate marketing into their product. As a student, I ask– what are those companies to do? Are they to re-invent the product and lose some of the brand power? Are they to re-organize the entire structure of that product? Etc.
Not to say that either of those approaches would be a bad thing, as it may still cost less than advertising. But really, I am curious.

By: Dennis Howlett

Dennis Howlett — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:03:33 +0000

Nice one Hugh — just right for my audience. Should confuse them no end!

By: Jem

Jem — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 23:32:13 +0000

Is it just me or are you cartoons plagued with cynicism, swearwords and anger rather than humour of late?
Is something festering old chap?

By: Crawford

Crawford — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:29:45 +0000

I read the italics. I read them again. PR, thought I. That’s what used to be thought of as the playground of PR. Hmmmmm. So more lines are blurred. Good. More blur equals more opportunity. Dontcha love this new digital life?