MarketingNPV just published an article I wrote on neuromarketing (free registration required).
The much-hyped “Project Apollo” consumer research initiative is dead, MediaPost reports today:
“Despite a promising level of interest, we did not secure sufficient client commitments to make Project Apollo a sustainable venture for our two companies,” Arbitron and Nielsen said in a joint statement. “We are grateful to the companies, consultants and to the marketing and advertising agency executives of the seven Project Apollo Steering Committee members who helped us explore the cutting edge of media and marketing research.”
Conceived in 2004 by Arbitron and VNU (now The Nielsen Company), Apollo was meant to provide marketers with a “single-source” measurement of media and advertising, in order to show better linkage between advertising and consumer purchase behavior. Apollo had a few significant backers, notably Procter & Gamble, but the project seemed doomed from the start, considering its high cost to implement, its reliance on “portable people meter” devices, and its focus on TV, radio, and print media, with little more than lip service paid to online channels. A 2006 pilot encompassing more than 5,000 households and 11,000 people (presumably toting PPMs around their necks) apparently didn’t do enough to convince major advertisers to sign on for a commercial rollout.
As an aside, never has a “forward-looking statements” clause in a press release seemed so prescient:
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The statements regarding Arbitron in this document that are not historical in nature, particularly those that utilize terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “likely,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “believes” or “plans,” or comparable terminology, are forward-looking statements based on current expectations about future events, which we have derived from information currently available to us. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause our results to be materially different from results implied in such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, in no particular order, whether we will be able to:
- successfully implement the rollout of our Portable People MeterTM service;
- successfully design, recruit, and maintain PPM panels that appropriately balance research quality, panel size and operational cost;
- successfully obtain and/or maintain Media Rating Council accreditation for our audience measurement services;
- renew contracts with large customers as they expire;
- successfully execute our business strategies, including entering into potential acquisition joint-venture, or other material third-party agreements;
- effectively manage the impact, if any, of any further ownership shifts in the radio and advertising agency industries;
- respond to rapidly changing technological needs of our customer base, including creating new proprietary software systems and new customer products and services that meet these needs in a timely manner;
- successfully manage the impact on our business of any economic downturn generally and in the advertising market in particular; and
- successfully manage the impact on costs of data collection due to lower respondent cooperation in surveys, privacy concerns, consumer trends, technology changes and/or government regulations.
- successfully develop and implement technology solutions to measure multi-media and advertising in an increasingly competitive environment.
Single-source measurement is a critically important, yet critically complex, and therefore an extremely elusive goal of marketers. The millions of dollars wasted on Apollo won’t help the cause.
I’ve been working with a client on an article about innovation, specifically how companies can identify not just the best new ideas, but the ones that are most likely to succeed in the market. In other words, you need to figure out which innovative ideas – for new products or marketing programs or packaging or distribution or whatever – will actually make money and help your company grow.
Sometimes the smallest innovations have the biggest impact. Consider the new packaging for the bag of Oreos we bought last week. You know how it used to work: You rip open the wrapper around the plastic tray or Oreos, and a week later any cookies that are left are stale, because there’s no way to re-seal the bag. (Not that Oreos last too long in our household, but hey, it happens.) But now Kraft has added a re-sealable Easy Open Tab to the top of the packgage – you pull it back to grab a few cookies and it sticks back in place when you’re done. Freshness preserved!
Apparently Kraft’s Snack ‘n’ Seal design has been around since 2005, debuting on a package of Chewy Chips Ahoy, and the design won an innovation award last year. I don’t know how much the packaging will add to Kraft’s bottom line – who knows, it may actually hurt profits by extending the life of every purchase – but the company certainly wins a few customer appreciation points.
I’m constantly on the lookout for up-to-date stats for the various projects I’m working on and can spend hours Googling for just the right piece of supporting information. A website that aggregates data and research from multiple sources could be a great time-saver. But man, this site is tough to digest. Banners and chart thumbnails and logos compete equally for your visual attention on the home page, with very little to distinguish the content from the advertising. Navigation aids and the search box seem randomly placed in the bottom right of the first screen, requiring a scroll on my toolbar-heavy browser. Have I mentioned that I hate vendor logos? They’re a useless and distracting graphic element.
I guess home pages are less critical in the current world of RSS feeds and e-mail subscriptions. (And yes, I signed up for the site’s daily feed.) And it seems that the site actually has some useful content. But holy cow, what a visual disaster.