|
|
|
|
|
Below-the-line promotional tactics are giving way to proper full-glare media advertising. At last.
They had gone below the line. 'Below the line'? To anyone from a more sober part of the business value chain, that sounds ghastly. Like being underground. In the sewage system, or worse. Marketers, however, assure you that going 'below the line' is nothing more drastic than shifting part of the marketing budget to non-media promotional activities. Bazaar contests, public space hoopla, phone-in gifting and all the rest of the razzmataaz. The only trouble is... below-the-line enthusiasts are beginning to stop and sniff at themselves, and are discovering that the whiffs they get are not all that rosy. Below the line marketing, you see, is not what marketers want to be caught doing anymore. It's not the kind of stuff that looks good in autobiographies, maybe even on resumes. Why is that? Now this is going to sound heavy, so brace yourself. For one, mass brands are supposed to behave like mass brands. They maximise revenue by maximising offtake. So the brands are aimed at everyone in the documented target bracket, with every potential customer engaged on equal terms. This means none of the arbitrary sample selection mechanisms (for freebies) that are inevitable in any below-the-line scheme (unless it's utterly random). Granted that target audiences are defined in increasingly psychographic terms too, apart from the regular demographic descriptors. Target refinement makes for marketing efficiency. But still, it takes the wide-angled appeal of mass media to reach an audience wide enough to overcome the problem of arbitrary non-inclusion. Some potential customers prefer to stay anonymous, rarely if ever stepping forth to participate in the group-setting activities and reward schemes that so excite below the line types. Is it fair to ignore their custom? It's a simple matter of principle, really. Whatever a wide-appeal brand does, and however it chooses to engage the consumer, should be in the full glare of the media gaze. Anyone who wants to get a look in, should be free to. That means no private deals. And no propositions whispered quietly in individual customers' ears. On that view, below the line is every bit as sleazy as the term suggests, even if it has given many customers and brand managers whoops of joy. The other big argument (and it's an argument that you are free to counter) against below the line activities is the myopia of the exercise. It so happens that a marketing budget is treated by accountants as an expense, like the electricity bill, but any marketer who understands brand value knows that the money is meant for securing consumer mindspace for the long term, not for frittering away on bribes for a few people who save your skin helping you cross your target mark. Brands gain power over years and years, and the consumer relationship is meant to be something of mutual trust that actually endures through thick and thin. This is the stuff of intangible value addition. This is the reason that a brand is worth so much more than just the physical product. This is why marketers are able to look their kids in the eyes and tell them that they are not snake oil conmen, but earnest contributors to economic value. Marketing was never meant to be about quickies in dark alleys. At least not all the time. Short-termist temptations be what they may be, the job is still pretty much the same. The most reliable, cost efficient and just way for mass market brands to strike and reinforce their customer relationships, is via judiciously chosen media vehicles. Below the line has had its run. It's about time brands re-emerged.
|
|
Issue Contents Write to us Subscription Syndication INDIA TODAY |
INDIA TODAY PLUS © Living Media India Ltd |
 |
 |
Marketers
had gone missing. There weren't there at their desks. They weren't to be
found in AV rooms. Not even out lunching with ponytailed agency types.
They were not on air. They were not in print. They were not anywhere in
direct range of a normal 20/20 pair of eyes.