Below is a great example of why a company should use PR first to launch a new brand and advertising to reinforce the position....

The mass market consumer thinks, "If this is such a big deal, why haven't I heard about it?" To prove my point below are powerful brands that were built with PR not advertising...

Why is PR so effective when launching a brand? PR is credible. Advertising rarely changes a person's perception of a product/service. Advertising is good for reinforcing a position already in the mind.

Two similar companies with similar technologies were launched, one launched with PR and the other with advertising. One brand is in trouble while the other is thriving. The two brands: Vonage and Skype.

Once PR has run its course it is time to advertise. The problem is that companies that were built with PR and word of mouth think they don't need to advertise. This is a big mistake.

My advice to Facebook, Google, Amazon.com, and Zappos, bring on the advertising. Twitter and Zynga, continue with PR.

Or should I say repositioning. One of the reasons I enjoy watching marketing efforts during an election year is that you see more repositioning campaigns in 45 days than you will see all year. Repositioning is a tactic rarely used but can be extremely powerful. Below is a political ad run by Christine O'Donnell against Chris Coons that is very effective.

The ad is effective because it focuses on a perception that is already in the mind of the voter-that democrats raise taxes. Christine even created a new website...CoonstheTaxMan.com (link). One of the reasons that repositioning works during elections is that there are too many candidates running at the same time, you end up with information overload and little is remembered.

Repositioning also works because most people don't trust politicians and negative ads about other candidates usually agree with common held perceptions in the mind.

Will this ad be enough for Christine to battle back and win in a Blue State after being branded a "witch?" It is unlikely. But she is not going down without a fight.

Below is the newly created Gap logo which is not being well received by the public....

I must say that I am shocked that The Gap would make such a drastic change to their logo. The problem facing most companies today is a strategic one, not execution.

See, most companies think it is all in the execution. "It doesn't matter what we name our company/product and logo's don't matter"- so the thinking goes. If logos didn't matter people wouldn't get so upset when a company makes a change. People love brands.

When your company penetrates the mind and sticks (like The Gap did), it is important NOT to change things in a way that cause you to lose your stickiness. A logo helps your brand stick in the mind. While making incremental changes to your logo is a good idea, radical change is likely to backfire.

What is The Gap? Most consumers don't remember why they use to shop at The Gap. The problem is that The Gap is stick in the mushy middle. There is Old Navy at the low-end and Abercrombie & Fitch at the high-end. Logos do matter because they can help your brand penetrate the mind.

My guess is that the company will change back to the old logo in the near future.

Here are some other companies that missed the mark and made a radical with their logo.....

Here are a few that made small updates to modernize thier logo- a great idea.

If your brand is well known making small changes to your logo over time is a good idea. If you have an unknown brand and a bad logo a drastic change is probably for the best. Sales are not down at The Gap because of their logo- not yet anyways.

How do you know when a category of brands is in danger of becoming a commodity? When consumers always or frequently purchase the product which is on sale. As our economy limps on many brands, instead of holding tight and reminding the consumer why their brand is worth paying more for are becoming addicted to discounting.

Discounting is a strategy that destroys brands and categories in the long run.

One category that seems in danger of becoming a commodity is ice cream. Walk the isle of Walmart or Target and most consumers simply look at the price and see which brand of ice cream is on sale. Since brands like Blue Bunny, Breyer's, Dreyer's, Good Humor, Healthy Choice, Archer Farms, and a host of others don't own a word in the mind of the consumer their brands have little value.....thus the need to discount.

Compare that to a company in the ice cream category that is doing exactly what needs to be done (minus discounting). Häagen-Dazs is reminding the consumer why their ice cream is worth the extra dollar. I love this commercial from Häagen-Dazs....

This is the direction I would love to see Starbucks heading when it comes to advertising. No matter the commodity there is always a place for brands. Consumers love brands which is why brands always sell more than the generic.

Remember the white generic cans of beer and soda that stores sold as their "generic" brand?

Now companies like Walmart and Target have their own brand for thier generic. Target uses Archer Farms and its Up & Up brand to sell generic items.

As a consumer choice is a good thing. But how many choices does the consumer really need? As I shop for ice cream, do I really need or want 15 brands offering 10-15 types of ice cream. When choice leads to confusion categories can become a commodity.

Yes, consumers want value but value is a perception created in the mind by great brands--not by discounting.

Below is a new ad from Amazon for the Kindle. The ad highlights the new low price of the digital reader ($139) and the screen in the sunlight vs. the iPad. For those consumers who are torn between the two devices this commercial adds some ammunition for the Kindle. But in the race to become the go-to e-reader Amazon.com needs to go further.

While the Kindle is a great divergence device there are a few problems preventing the device as-is from making a mass market impact as the leader. Let's take a look at the price of a great marketing classic, Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind by Al Ries and Jack Trout.

Current Amazon.com paperback: $11.53.
Current Amazon.com Kindle Edition: $9.99

When considering the Kindle Edition the consumer thinks, "Why would a digital copy of a book cost only $1.54 less than a paperback?" The problem with the Kindle Edition price is Amazon's already low prices on regular books.

Amazon.com needs to position the Kindle beyond reading. For an e-reader to have mass market appeal it needs to not just be a reader but a library. If the Kindle was able to position itself as the "digital library" instead of a "digital reader" most consumers might rethink the $9.99 book price. A few suggestions that would allow the Kindle to be the leader in this growing and crowded market...

1) Position the Kindle as a "digital library." Show consumers how they can highlight, search, and retrieve books and information from their Kindle in an instant.

2) Slowly start charging more for "regular" books and drop the Kindle Edition prices to the $6-$10 range.

3) While the current commercial attacking the iPad might be effective for the small market of people comparing the devices, a much bigger piece of the market needs to see the benefits of having a digital library (Sitting on the beach with a Kindle is not effective advertising as most people still prefer a Corona).

4) Offer consumers who have purchased “regular” books from Amazon.com a discount to convert their library.

5) During the Christmas season the price of the device should be dropped to $99.

As Amazon.com positioned itself as the first “online bookstore” the Kindle needs to position itself as the “digital library” if they want to be able to hold off Apple and a host of others. Good luck.

For all the misses at Google lately I am thrilled at their latest innovation regarding search. Google is calling the innovation Google Instant. Google Instant allows users to search, in a sense "live" as they type. While this will hurt their paid seach business as users will click on less ads, in the long-run it will help the brand.

Too often brands innovate with line extensions which Google is getting quite good (bad) at....

Finally an innovation from Google that focuses on the word they own in the mind, "search." This innovation will surely make the user experience with Google much more enjoyable. Watching a company improve their focus is exciting. Innovation can help your company fight off new startups and increase your brands power in the mind of the consumer as long as it improves on the word you already own.

An innovation at your core doesn't need a new brand name but if you branch out away from your core with line extensions, you would be better served with new brands. The Internet world is still waiting for a P&G type company to come along. IAC is close but spun off its top brands; Expedia and LendingTree (which is now a brand mess) and their remaining portfolio of brands is fairly weak. Could Google learn from their branding mistakes in the past? We will have to wait and see.

In the world of branding consumers pay more for brands that offer a perceived value over a commodity. As retailers are struggling in today's economy does it make sense to price match? One thinks that it keeps the consumer from leaving the store or if they do it gets them to shop online and come back and purchase their product. Companies like Walmart and BestBuy are offering price matching. Does price matching help the long term value of your brand? Not in my opinion.

I went into Discount Tire (the specialist) today looking for two new tires for my SUV. The prices of tires for an SUV are making me rethink my choice of transportation. The salesmen looked at my car and determined that I needed not two but four new tires. OK. He then added up the price with the instillation and care package and the total was $740. (If this is a discount I would hate to see the "real" price.) Having some experience in sales I said, "That's too much" (and didn't allow myself to say another word).

The salesman then went on to say that they "Price Match" and would beat any competitors price, including Walmart and Costco. I quickly thought, "Why don't they just offer me the best price now, do I really have to drive around and compare prices?"

Will some consumers' price match and save more money? Yes. Does it create customers who are never loyal to your brand and force you to drop your price to move merchandise? Yes. If you are a company that competes on price, offer your best price first and never negotiate or discount. A winning formula for creating a strong brand in the mind of the consumer.

I ended up going to Costco and the tires were $100 cheaper, so much for price matching.

With the release of the Apple TV the world is a abuzz again with Steve Jobs. The device is interesting, compelling, unique, and a copycat. Wait, a copycat....copy of what?

The Roku. A machine that offers all of the same features of the Apple TV and they have been out for quite some time. Why have most people never heard of the Roku? I don't know...bad name, lack of a category, no simple message...to name a few. They were never able to penetrate the mind.

Most people love Steve Jobs. He is a brilliant marketer and a cult hero. While Steve may be a smart marketing strategist he is a MASTER at one key marketing law...The Law of the Mind.

First in the marketplace means nothing unless you are able to be the first in the mind. Steve Jobs is amazing because he knows that by getting in the mind first, you win. What and who is Roku? Unfortunately for them a brand that will never be able to penetrate the mind in the mass market. Steve Jobs and Apple are never first to the market but often they are first in the mind. Many will argue that it is because Apple products are simply better. Tell that to Roku who built an amazing product. God Bless America.

This is the opposite of what you may hear in the media and business world. People will tell you that products converge over time when in fact they do the opposite. Categories over time diverge. This picture below is what convergence looks like in the average mind (mine of course)....

iWhat? is exactly what I was thinking. Years ago when HP came out with a simple, inexpensive, all in one revolutionary home business machine the world was captivated. And I was too and purchased one of the machines....

The HP machine came out and was going to prove that products do in fact converge. Was I happy with my purchase? At first, yes. After about the first week I went to use the fax machine and it didn't work. Ok. Next I wanted to scan a 5 page document. I then realized I needed to lift the cover and scan each page one at a time. My disappointment was growing. I then started to use the printer and realized that most of the pages I was printing didn't need to be in color. And of coarse when the cartridges’ are running low it wouldn't let you print the page anyway so instead of printing a slightly lighter page I had to go and buy more ink at a price tag of around $50.

After about 2 years of constant frustration (I can't believe I made it that long) I stopped using the machine. I never even used the fax portion since it never worked. Now, instead of using the generalist I use the specialist.

I use a stand alone laser printer (for printing of course)....

A stand alone fax machine....

And a seperate scanner......

Money, time, and energy can be saved if you believe in the law of divergence. It could have saved me years ago and yes, I should have known better. Now the law of divergence is well implanted in my memory.

Tinkering- To make unskilled or experimental efforts at repair; fiddle. That is what came to my mind as I drove by the new signage at my local Village Inn. The old font was unique, legible, and somewhat iconic. I am by nature a positive person so I will refrain from my opinion on the new logo. Village Inn has been around since 1958, started in my hometown of Denver (great city).

Originally founded as a pancake house they quickly expanded the menu and the number of restaurants when they become a publically-traded company in 1982 and by the late 1980's the "Pancake House" was dropped. About 15 years later the company filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11. A few quick lessons that can be learned from Village Inn...

1) Never lose focus

2) It may take a while to see your successful or unsuccessful marketing strategy

3) Tinkering is for the unskilled

4) Beware of successful companies that file an IPO

5) Leave the initials (vi) to IBM, ABC, NBC, CBS, and GE.

6) If you want the best pancakes they are no longer at VI, they can only be found at The Original Pancake House.