Skip to main content

Response to: "In the high-tech industry does running a large television advertising campaign really help brand building or lead generation?"

First posted to Quora (7/3/12):


Brand building is a long-term activity while lead generation is short-term. 


Brand building yields few visible results in the short term, but carried out consistently over a period of years, provides an outstanding support for lead generation in the short-term.

TV ad campaigns can effectively build brands, for sure. This includes the high-tech industry or any industry. 

* The Apple campaign pitting the cool Apple person vs. the Microsoft geek decimated their image and built Apple's to the hilt - it was not about selling product but building an image. 

* The Intel campaigns with their distinctive "bam bam bam bam" sound, and the employees behind it, built an image for the company as a leader. Of course ads work.

So the question is not whether ad campaigns work but whether they work FOR YOUR PURPOSE. And whether they yield sufficient return on investment.

If the sales campaign (you say lead generation so it makes me think sales) is oriented toward a business customer, TV ads probably are too large an investment to yield a short-term result. Word of mouth and trade shows would be a more cost-effective route.

If however you are aiming to the average person like myself, and you seek to reach a large audience, then TV ads start to make more sense as a way to build a base for later sales efforts. This is particularly true if you're trying to sell expensive product - TV ads make it seem that the product is well-made and well-funded.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

________________
All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …