mktg@msft

Who Are These Pre-Teens Anyway?

Lately the topic of Pre-Teens comes up more and more, especially as we develop marketing plans for Project Natal (check out Milo and Kate to see what kinds of things are coming).  I think it's great that my kids can be my very own focus group, and though I'm not "Super Dad" by any means, I spend a lot of time, attention, and--er--money on my four pre-teens (ages 7 to 12). 

One thing I can tell you is that targeting pre-teens as a group is almost impossible.  And not especially effective.  My 7 year old girl (or for that matter my 9 year old girl) is as different as can be than my 12-year old son. 

They don't play the same games. One of my boys likes music games like Rock Band, and the other likes RPGs and FPSs (thank goodness for Parental Controls).  My 9 year old daughter would rather play games on the PC than the Xbox 360, and my 7 year old rarely plays the Xbox 360 (gasp!--I can't even market to her effectively, and I'm somewhat an infuencer in her world--and in the family gatekeeper, her mom!). 

They don't value the same things (pleasing parents isn't at the top of my 12 year old's list of motivations).  My daughter thinks it cool when I chaperone her field trips, and still wants to hold my hand when she crosses the street.  My boy wants to pretend he doesn't know me when I chaperone his PTO activites. 

They don't eat the same kinds of food.  One of our kids is conscientious about what she eats, and tries to avoid too much junk food.  Another can't get enough sugar.  My 12 year old is learning to cook, and he likes things that are homemade more than packaged.  They're actually getting tired of pizza, and their taste is evolving away from McDonalds to towards Red Robin. 

They don't watch the same TV shows.  My 12 year old isn't watching Disney Channel. My 9 year old boy wants to be like his 12 year old brother, but he still thinks Drake and Josh are funny.  My 9 year old daughter would rather play outside than watch TV, but likes iCarly, and watching American Idol with her mom.  My 7 year old still likes kids' shows like Words World, and gets nightmares when she watches scary parts of movies. 

They don't wear the same clothing brands.  Wearing an Xbox 360 shirt makes my boys cooler with their friends.  My daughter will wear Microsoft tee shirts, but only at home when she's playing or working. 

So it turns out that having one view of what a "Pre-teen" is could really limit how effective you are at reaching them with the right message.  Come to think of it, nobody matches their "demographic profile".  The trick is finding ways to efficiently reach smaller and smaller target markets with authentic, relevant messaging.  Easier said than done! 

Word of Mouth Marketing Association University

I'm at WOMMA's WOMM-U, a two-day deep dive into all things Social.  Halfway through the program, and I already have pages of notes, and dozens of ideas for optimizing our efforts.  You can watch what's happening real-time, at www.womma.org/wommu. 

Brand Connectors Drive WOM

I sat in on a conference call hosted by the Marketing Leadership Council, called Unleashing the Power of Word-of-Mouth Brand Advocacy, by Steve Knox from P&G Tremor. [I found a copy of a similar presentation on slideshare.net] 

One thing that stood out for me is that P&G Tremor has identified an interesting segment of early adopters called “Connectors.”   They make up about 10-15% of the population.  Key differentiation is that they are trend “spreaders,” rather than trend setters.  Trend setters do things because nobody else is doing them, and they stop when the trend becomes widespread.  Trend spreaders share ideas because they get their social status by introducing new ideas to their friends.  "We" vs. "me."

They also brought up something that I’ve never heard put quite so succinctly, the idea that Word of Mouth requires a message that Disrupts the Equilibrium, but that ties to the Brand Foundational Truth. 

They ask the following questions:
• What is uniquely talk-able about your brand?
• What is the consumer/customer insight that is driving your brand?
• What is the disruption that creates consumer conversations?
• Have you make your brand easy to talk about?
• What triggers are you providing to allow “talk” about your brand to occur naturally?

Corporations and Web 2.0 Adoption

I just added CRM for Xbox and Games for Windows to my responsibilities (in addition to Online Community), so I'm in the mode of catching up--it's been a while!

Everyone I talk to about my new role as Director of Customer and Community Relationship Management (that's a mouthful, tell me if you think of something better!) is intrigued by the idea that social networking, blogging, influencer marketing, WOM can actually live side by side with CRM and "traditional" Marcom.  I've been describing it as the infusion of targeted content and the machine of CRM.  The biggest challenge in WOM is distribution and reach (especially when most corporations are using the toolkit of traditional advertising), and the biggest challenge of good customer messaging is targeted, relevant content.

One of the few newsletters I allow through my mile-wide firewall at work is the Harvard Business Publishing's email update.  Josh Bernoff published something I've been talking about with co-workers on our Global Marketing team--Why Web 2.0 Is No Bubble: Corporations Are Willing to Pay for It. 

I am talking about companies that serve corporate social application needs. ...in many of these companies, the technology itself is positively mundane. But the startups grow because they deliver value for which they can charge a premium and get customer loyalty. The customers of these companies don't defect when something shiny and new comes along, because they like the service they're getting."

Jeff also outlines a handful of companies that are building tools to help push-start efforts, and prove the ROI.  It includes my friend Sam Decker's company, Bazaarvoice, and others that are helping companies get their arms around making sense of this new space. 

Every company is--or should be--grappling with making sense of what this all means to their Integrated Marketing efforts.  Some will approach it using existing strategies and tools, with limited results.  Others will ignore it, to their peril.  Hopefully your company is going to stay ahead of the wave.  My prediction is that it's only going to be possible if you're paying attention to what's going on, hiring the right people, partnering with the right firms, and investing appropriately.

Marketing BY Blogging (vs. Blogging About Marketing)

Just when I think nobody's paying any attention to this languishing blog, I'm notified by a co-worker that I'm listed in Peter Kim's list of "Top Marketer Blogs."  Thanks, Peter!  And thanks to all you who still have a subscription to the feed or are watching this space. 

About once a week I think about posting something here, but with four kids at home, another blog (www.gamerscoreblog.com) that gets jeleaous when I cheat on her, and my extraordiarily busy work schedule, I don't get around her often enough. 

Something about "practicing what you preach," I guess.  I'm having an awesome time actually using all these fancy-schmancy Web 2.0 tools to do some real live brand marketing for Xbox.  I'm working with a passionate group of employees dedicated to supporting bloggers/podcasters who love our products.   I started with this blog, and have been lucky to actually get to be paid to do all the things I'd probably do anyway.  But I'm kind of stuck in "walking the walk" instead of "talking the talk."   

Feel free to watch the blog for my near-daily posts, though most of those are product-specific.  And if you're interested, you can catch our weekly podcast, our nearly-weekly video podcast, and my occasionally-updated Twitter feed. 

Speed Dating Exec Interview Commuinty Mashup

We're always trying to come up with new ways to involve our gamer community bloggers and podcasters.  I wrote up one thing we did at a recent trade show, E3, to get some face time for independant bloggers/podcasters with our executive staff, who normally only speaks with mainstream press.  Originally posted on Gamerscore Blog.

On Wednesday night, we held our first ever “speed interviews” sessions. Because E3 is such a short time with a lot of journalists and analysts, our executives were booked doing interviews or demos from 8am to 6pm, and every night there were meetings, parties, and other events that our executives were expected to attend. There just isn’t enough time in such a short period to include everyone who wanted one on one time with our execs.

We’ve done a few successful “blogger breakfast” sessions in the past, but we decided that doing a big, formal roundtable with several different might not be the best way to give our community members time with our execs. To keep it intimate, only a few sites were invited to the breakfast meetings, and even that format didn’t allow for much of a personal touch. Our community members didn’t get any one-on-one time with the executives, and didn’t let each site ask the questions for their particular communities (or were afraid of getting scooped if they did). The sites we invited tended to be the largest sites that really should be getting full appointments during the day (like Joystiq, Engadget, Kotaku, etc.), leaving out some of our most passionate community podcasters, bloggers, forum posters, and fan site owners. We know we invite everyone we can to our C3@E3 party, and our execs all love hanging out and chatting with community members there, but even a long conversation at a party doesn’t substitute for a formal interview.

We thought through the options, and figured that if speed dating could give you a feel for a possible “love connection” in a few minutes, maybe it would work for us not the love part, but maybe the “personal connection” part ;) ). Whether “speed interviews” was going to be a boom or a bust was anyone’s guess, but everyone liked the idea (at least in principle), so Tony, Chris, and April from our events staff set it up, and our executive staff agreed to give it a try.

Xbox.com posts a 360 degree panoramic view of the room.

We set up eight tables across a room, and had eight executives from different parts of our business sit at each one. The list included Peter Moore, Jeff Bell, Peter Molyneaux, Chris Early, Kevin Unangst, Aaron Greenberg, John Rodman, and Bungie’s Brian Gerard and Frank O’Connor.

We then chose leaders from several community sites, including Xbox360Fanboy, Evil Avatar, GamertagRadio, Achievement Junkie, and active forum posters from sites like TeamXbox, and Xbox.com.

Each group met for four minutes, then took one minute to move to the next table. After a round of eight interviews, we took a five minute break, and brought in eight more groups. I know four minutes doesn’t sound like much, but because each interviewer came prepared with questions, everyone jumped right in, and got to ask some questions nobody else had thought of. I haven’t seen any reports of the meetings, but everyone who participated thought it turned out great.

We hope our community leaders got to know our execs a little better, and gathered some unique information to report back to their community.  We were able to try a format that got as many community members through as we could. Our execs got a break from the journalists and analysts they’d been meeting with all week, and had a chance to get to know some of our community leaders, and hear what their community members are asking.

I hope it gives you a glimpse of the value we all put on the community. We appreciate all your passion, your support, your suggestions, your patience when things go wrong, and even your criticisms. From our executives to all of us who dedicate all our time to supporting community, our games business wouldn’t be where it is without you. For those that couldn’t be there this time, you should know we’re always looking for more ways to involve all of you whenever we can.

I posted a few photos of the interviews on Flickr, and I’ll post links to the stories/write-ups/podcasts as I can.

Gamertag Radio
E307 Coverage: Bungie Interview
E307 Coverage: Peter Molyneux from Lionhead Studios Interview

Evil Avatar
[E3 2007] - 4 Minutes with Microsoft Execs

Xbox 360 Fanboy
X3F interview: 4 minutes in the dark with Peter Moore

Marketing Forum 2007

Last week, I joined several hundred executives for 3 days at Richmond Event’s The Marketing Forum, held aboard the Norwegian Dawn.  Now, before you begin with cries of junkets, boondoggles, or misuse of corporate funds, let me explain a bit more.

Richmond Events has come up with a unique way of solving many of the common problems that these types of events have.  First, the event is paid for by a hundred or so suppliers, including marketing consultants, advertising and PR firms, executive coaches, industry service providers, and other professionals.  In return for paying for the three-day conference, they have a 100% captive (even captured) audience.

The boat left the dock on Wednesday night, and set sail for international waters near the Hamptons on Long Island.  Once there, they dropped anchor.  You might be imagining lounging by the pool, hitting the buffets, going to shows or movies, gambling in the casino, or hitting the beach.  But that’s where the brilliance of Richmond’s approach kicks in. 

The entire ship is dedicated to this event.  And since the suppliers are paying for the clients to be there, the boat is at their disposal.  The pools (except for one in the spa) were closed.  The casino, the shops, and the bars were all closed during meeting times.  And because it’s late spring, even lounging on the main deck (by the drained pool) meant brisk winds, temperatures in the 50-60’s, and as far as the eye can see--fog.  All meals are served at an assigned table at an assigned time.  To top it off, there was limited access to internet and spotty cell-phone coverage.

The days were broken into 15-minute increments, and absolutely every hour was planned, from 7:30 am to after midnight.  Breakfast began at 7:30, the day progressed with 30-minute back-to-back meetings between suppliers and clients.  Throughout the day, there were workshop sessions about marketing topics (given by suppliers), and even the meals were sponsored by a supplier, so you had 60-90 minutes at a table with one or two other clients and the supplier.

There are several ways to sum up the experience: Grueling. Frenetic. Exhausting.  By now, you’re thinking it sounds like a marketer’s description of hell: being forced to listen to pitch after pitch, with no place to hide, no emergency to force a reschedule.  It was grueling.  But it was also invigorating.  Inspiring.  Personal.  Powerful.  And yes, worthwhile.

I am approached several times a week by suppliers who appreciate having access to me through my email address published on my personal or Xbox blog.  Usually, they’re unrelated to anything I oversee personally, and though I pass them along, I feel bad that I don’t have time to respond personally, make introductions, follow up, or evangelize their ideas.  With everything going on “in real life,” they often fall to the bottom of the email queue, or even get ignored for weeks. 

You can imagine how difficult it is to meet new suppliers, let alone get to know them personally, tap into their ideas, share my ideas, and go beyond what could be shared in a brochure.  Even when I do have meetings, I rarely get a chance to have conversations with suppliers without them being overly-formal.

Having assigned meetings with ample time to get past the “introduction” proved to be quite powerful.  I was able to present enough information about the projects I’m working on to allow both of us to have a meaningful conversation.  Even if the fit wasn’t perfect (you usually knew pretty quickly), we got the chance to talk as industry peers, and begin building a relationship.  We got to talk about our families, our jobs, our personal interests, and what we’re trying to achieve for our businesses.  From my perspective, I feel much better introducing someone I know at a more personal level.  And I think if I approached a co-worker, executive, or someone I know from another company (or industry), and started off by saying I had a meeting with this company, I was impressed with what I saw, and I can personally introduce someone from the supplier to them.  It makes a big difference.

On the first evening, there was a keynote speaker.  Chuck Martin, author of SMARTS: Are we Hardwired for Success?.  He presented some interesting comments about how to identify and leverage an individual’s inherent strengths/talents.  Great speech, totally in line with a lot of study I’ve done personally about brain research and executive function. 

After the keynote, we held a series of “speed meetings” that can only be described as “Speed Dating.”  In one hour, I met with 10 different suppliers that I wouldn’t have time to meet during the longer meetings the next two days.  Every five minutes, a bell would ring, and everyone would find their next “speed meeting.”  Not much more you can do in 4-5 minutes but do an introduction, but I did make some contact with a couple of suppliers I’ll definitely follow up with. 

On the last evening, there was another keynote by Chris Gardner, the man the movie “The Pursuit of Happyness” is about.  He was quite engaging, a great storyteller, and very inspiring to me as a father.  The audience was spellbound for the entire speech, and everyone seemed to think about the opportunity they have as employers to make a difference in someone’s life. 

Near the end of the last night, I got 45 minutes of executive coaching from Jan Austin, a prominent executive coach.  I was able to articulate a few things I’d been working on, and together we came up with some solid steps I’ll be taking to keep up with the goals I’ve set.

On Saturday morning, we all had to disembark by 9:00 am. 

Would I recommend it?  Without hesitation.  In fact, I already signed up for next year.  I’ll sum it up by saying this is the first time I’ve ever left a multi-day conference where I felt this invigorated.

The Long Tail of Video Games

Chris Anderson, author of the popular new book "The Long Tail," comments on Peter Moore's recent Ziff Davis conference speech.  Chris says:

It's worth noting that Microsoft's Xbox Live Arcade platform, which is an on-demand marketplace for small and inexpensive casual games, many of them created by small teams on even smaller budgets, is a great example of the Long Tail of games. In an industry where the cost of developing a traditional console game is now measured in the tens of millions of dollars, a way to reach those same consumers via a online marketplace with infinite shelf space and a place for niche titles of all sort (include re-releases of classic titles from gaming's past) is a perfect way to "scale down" to the market lost to the hits.

By the way, I got a copy of the book, and have read most of it.  Fascinating to anyone pondering how the world of marketing is changing because of the internet, and with the help of online communities

Xbox 360 Marketing

Okay, I held off for a few days before making a post, but every time I stumble across the URL for the first “Weekly Marketing Column” from Next-Gen, I feel the need to rant a bit.  Let me give you some of my patented "my opinion only" get-what-you-pay-for marketing wisdom.

Normally, I rely on Next-Gen to supply me with my morning dose of news.  Like Peter Moore, “I get it” (the newsletter, that is).  This time, they overstepped the boundaries of common sense and marketing savvy with this article.  It was largely dismissed by most of those I work with, but I wanted to at least respond because I enjoy writing about my experience in marketing at Microsoft.  The past few years working on the Xbox 360 has been fascinating, and though not perfect, I think we've done some amazing things with the launch.

I'm almost embarrassed by the conclusions expressed by this “experienced and senior games marketer.” I can understand why Next-Gen ends the story with “The opinions expressed in this column are held by the author and are not necessarily shared by Next Generation.” 

Vijay (a pseudonym), over at Next-Gen.biz, writes the first in a series of columns about marketing in the games world.  His inaugural post is about the marketing behind the Xbox 360.

Next Generation's new regular column is dedicated to the world of marketing campaigns. Our columnist - an experienced and senior games marketer working under a pseudonym - starts by looking at one of the most important campaigns in the industry's history. He's not impressed...

Microsoft reportedly spent $100m on its launch of Xbox 360 last year. Numbers can be misleading, and I'm always suspicious of these big, round numbers. But even if it's 100% accurate, the money was not 100% well spent.

Of course the $100 million is a round number.  Are you suggesting that stories like this should be accurate to the dime?  Would you rather see “Microsoft reportedly spent 922,643,153.22 on the launch of the Xbox 360”?   Would that make you any less suspicious?  With the kind of statement you’re making (Microsoft spent a bunch of money), what difference does it make if it’s $90m or $110m or $100m or $922,643,153.22.  So is $100m a big number?  Would you be impressed if it were less?  Or more?  Does the fact that it’s not 100% accurate make a difference to you in your judgment that the money wasn’t 100% well spent? 

Maybe I should lighten up.  It’s not like Next-Gen claims that Vijay is an experienced journalist, or senior writer, just that he’s an experienced marketer…

Despite a strong product, a great PR campaign and a launch sell-out, there was much to learn from the campaign, most notably, in my view, woolly-minded product positioning, a less-than impressive case design and a weak TV campaign.

Thanks for the complements.  We agree that the product is strong, and the PR campaign was great.  Throughout the launch, we had a couple of goals.  One of them was to sell all the consoles we could make.  The other was to position the product properly to potential short-term, and long-term customers.  Since we are selling every one we can make, I’m going to suggest that we did okay with short-term potential customers.  I also agree that there is much to learn from the campaign (though woolly-minded product positioning isn’t first on my personal list). 

Firstly, that nice big number. Does a $100mln marketing budget include Europe and Japan, or just North America? Is it paid media only, or does it include production? PR? Channel Marketing? Web design? E3 booth construction? Peter Moore’s dry cleaning bill?

I suspect this nice round number is no more than that: a nice round number that sounds impressive but might not hold up under scrutiny.

Didn’t we cover this already?  Where did you get this number?  From whom was it “reported”?  If you included your source, it would be easy to confirm, deny, or add clarification.  I think most marketing professionals, especially experienced, senior marketers, would look at a statement like “Microsoft reportedly spent $100m on its launch of the Xbox 360 last year” and realize that a “marketing launch” (especially what we call a “worldwide launch”) would include all three regions where we launched.  I can’t imagine anyone with any tenure in marketing who wouldn’t know that media spend is only a part of the media mix.  What other budget would have paid for ad production, if not the marketing budget?  Of course PR is part of the marketing budget.  And so are trade show booths.  And channel marketing.  And web design.  And if Peter had to have a suit cleaned while he traveled the globe meeting with global partners, I’m guessing his dry cleaning might even be included.

Nevertheless, I've recently spent some time seeing what Microsoft got for its $100mln, and the results are, at best, mixed.

So Vijay doesn’t trust the $100m figure, but then goes on to assume that we actually did spend $100mln so he could make the argument that the results were mixed.  Okay…

The first question is: why spend money on TV adverts since the PR hype  Microsoft orchestrated was so impressive? Even my grandmother knew 360 was coming.

So this experienced, senior marketer is suggesting that TV adverts are solely to inform customers that the product was coming?  Did his grandmother stand in line to buy one?  If not, why not? 

Let's remember that it was embarrassing "manufacturing constraints" that limited the sell-thru numbers during the peak holiday sales period. It was not a blindingly wonderful marketing campaign.

Yes, we were disappointed that our product was limited because of manufacturing constraints.  Maybe even embarrassed at times.  But are you suggesting that if it wasn’t for the manufacturing constraints limiting sell-through, a blindingly-wonderful marketing campaign would have limited demand?  To what end?  Or are you saying that the reason there was short supply was because of manufacturing, and not because of overwhelming demand because of marketing? 

Conspiracy theorists think this shortage was part of Microsoft’s plan to drive awareness, increase purchase intent (scarcity breeds demand),  and Microsoft’s stock price. But it was all down to error. Xbox 360 is a natural winner, a highly demanded product backed up by some good games. But that doesn't mean everything about the way it was sold has been perfect.

So Vijay is basing the first half of this article on “reported yet unsubstantiated marketing budget, his assumptions about what should and shouldn’t be included in that marketing budget, and conspiracy theories?  Are you saying our “error” was creating a false shortage?  Let me just say this: Product shortages may drive awareness, but not having product during peak holiday demand doesn’t increase purchase intent, and it certainly doesn’t drive up a stock price.  My guess is that anyone with experience in video games knows that console manufacturers don’t make money on consoles, we only make money on games sales. 

Product Positioning

First of all, let's talk about product positioning. Microsoft stated that 360 was designed "to create a living entertainment experience powered by human energy.” Huh? And the product benefit is what exactly?

Frankly, this kind of positioning statement is woolly. In the real world bicycles are an experience powered by human energy. Do you have to generate your own electricity to operate 360? Is the new Xbox a piece of home exercise equipment?

I’ve never heard the term “woolly” used in this context.  Does it mean hairy?  Fuzzy?  Beyond that, I thought you mentioned above that we didn’t even need to do advertising, because even your grandmother knew the product was coming out.  Did your grandmother tell you she thought the Xbox was a piece of home exercise equipment?  The point you’re missing is that the positioning above is directional and aspirational.  I don’t think we included the words “living entertainment experience” or “human energy” in any of our TV ads. 

What a consumer hopes to learn from product positioning is what the bloody thing does. Barring that, they want to know why the new Xbox is better than old Xbox? And if Microsoft won’t tell us that, at least clue us in on 360’s competitive advantage versus PlayStation. Or maybe how the damn thing entertains you? I've never seen such impressive features consigned to "mouse print" before.

You also seem to forget that “early adopters” know what the bloody thing does.  They’re gamers.  They play games.  They played games on the original Xbox.  They are buying the new Xbox to play games.  Did you see any of our product ads?  Where we highlight Xbox Live and shots of PGR3?  Or NBA 2K6 where we show sweat glistening from Shaq’s head as he tosses a free throw?  Did you visit Xbox.com, or Gamespot, or IGN, or Gaming-Age, or any of the other places hard core gamers visit regularly?  The customers that stood in line (in fact all those that have purchased up to today) have. 

Don’t get me wrong.  We’re going to get to the point where we need to sell the system by touting its features one by one.  But not for some time.  As for those that have never heard of “Xbox,” or think it’s an exercise machine, a list of why it’s better than the original Xbox isn’t going to help it sell.  To them, we need to introduce it slowly. 

Some more research on 360 reveals that the customer is placed at "the center of the experience… it’s a videogame and an entertainment system…that integrates music, picture, games and movies…everything revolves around you."

This is more like it.

Thanks.  See, you get the concept of the term 360.  Glad we got that clear. 

Of course, hardcore gamers know what 360 is about. But Microsoft needs to appeal to the mass market in order to make the platform successful.

Unfortunately, the mass market (especially casual gamers) need to be sold on the benefits of a new system before they upgrade, or in the case of newbies, buy one. After all, Microsoft is charging a lot of money for the 360. People want to know what they are buying. The marketing message largely fails to deliver this message.

You’re right about that.  That’s why we’re starting our marketing by introducing the concept, rather than a long list of features.  Casual gamers don’t care that the system has a dual-core processor, or a 12X DVD drive, or that games play in Dolby 5.1 and 720p HD.  By design, our marketing message isn’t about telling people what they’re buying. 

The name

The situation isn’t clarified by the product name, either.

What does 360 mean? How does it relate to a customizable entertainment system that puts the customer at the center of the experience,? It is vague, abstract, subtle at best. And the market does not like subtle.

Didn’t you just tell us what 360 meant above?  Is it “more like it”?  Or “vague, abstract, subtle at best”?  Would you suggest that we do away with the name “Xbox” (what does “X” stand for anyway?  And it’s not really a box, it’s not even made out of cardboard!)?  Should we have called it Xbox 2?  How is that less vague than Xbox 360?  Should we call it the “Microsoft Video Games Console Second Edition?  Or “Customizable Entertainment System That Puts You In The Center of the Experience” (maybe CESTPYITCOTE for short)?  It’s an Xbox.  It needed something to differentiate it from the original Xbox.  And by your admission, using the term 360 is “more like it.” 

The new logo reprises the original Xbox’s bright green motif, and it's easy to see how a circle reflects the 360 concept (kind of). These are positives. But if the name does not clearly explain 360’s benefits, then how can the consumer fully understand the positioning statement?

So a Honda Accord XL clearly defines the benefits?  Or Audiovox SMT 5600?  Or Apple iPod?  Or Toshiba Techra?  Or Cheerios?  Or Budweiser?  Or Doritos? 

Perhaps the hardware has some answers...

The design

Certainly 360 has a smaller footprint than the original model, which is an improvement. But the color choice (a generic computer beige), and its rounded edges look like a dental appliance. The design does not give any appreciable idea what this box might do. The design should be part of the message. But it fails to communicate much beyond the fact that it needs to be plugged in.

The only thing Microsoft got really right in terms of product design was correcting the oversized controller from the original Xbox. But this just eliminates a negative. It doesn't provide a convincing positive.

Wow, this is the first time I’ve ever heard the Xbox 360 compared to a dental appliance.  Perhaps we should begin marketing our custom faceplates to dental offices around the world.  There’s a limit to what you can do with a device with 1700 different parts, especially a device with chips and drives and audio and video.  We easily could have made the box larger (which you admit you wouldn’t do).  So the alternative is to make the console as small as possible, yet powerful enough to house a sophisticated computer. 

Do you think it needs more lights?  More buttons?  More branding?  More writing?  By your estimation, the time and money we spent by testing dozens of concepts with customers worldwide was misguided.  I agree that design is part of the overall message, but I disagree that the design has to communicate what the console does.  I guess you disagree with most consumers that simple lines and a clean ID are what’s appealing to customers now.  But then again, your opinion isn’t necessarily shared by Next Generation.

Those TV ads

What about those Xbox 360 TV ads? I hope Microsoft didn’t spend the entire $100m on TV advertising because I feel the campaign would have been lost on a lot of people.

The tag line "Jump In" was inviting, but the TV spots themselves were vague and reeked of Madison Avenue talking to itself.

Chalk it up to your opinion.

Two TV spots, “Water Balloons” and "Jump Rope" were fun to watch and certainly reflected the tag line: "Jump In." But what did they mean? How did they relate to the product or the experience on offer?

You are clever enough to get the tag line, so I’m surprised that you don’t understand that the ads are introducing the idea that it’s more fun to play when you’re part of a community, that games have always been more fun when you play with friends.  These ads were meant to appeal to gamers in an entirely different way than you suggest. 

Marketing quiz for Vijay: If you’ve pre-sold your first several months of product, do you need to advertise features/benefits/offer?  If you’re trying to reach a new audience that think an Xbox is an exercise machine, or who won’t be in the market for several months, do you start with features/benefits/offer? 

Again there was nothing specific about a customizable entertainment system that puts you at its center etc etc...

Finally, there was the unfortunate spot from Argentina which showed people pretending to shoot one another in a Buenos Aires train station.

OK, this was a fun spot to watch. But again, it didn’t tell viewers anything about Xbox 360. Additionally, the US market has been grouchy lately and though kids would 'get' the spot without an issue, their parents (and the local politicians) would not be too happy with it.

I agree that the spot didn’t tell anyone what the Xbox 360 does, but you can’t argue with the fact that it appeals to gamers.  Maybe you didn’t play “cops and robbers,” or ever enter a train station and thought it felt like a movie scene, but most gamers like the idea of “playing” like they’re in a shootout.  And like the other ads, it’s a whole lot more fun when it’s done with other people. 

I’m not sure what the “grouchy US market” has to do with our product positioning.  The spot was for gamers.  And for the record, our target market is 18-34 year olds, not “kids.”  Last I checked, even Microsoft’s most popular game, Halo 2, was rated M. 

As a result, Microsoft was very, very clever to keep it off North American TV but leak it on the Internet, so they get points for media strategy if not for product communication.

Bottom line

After all the mega hype surrounding 360’s launch, why was the advertising so subtle? We know 360 is about customization and community. We understand what these words mean. These are compelling benefits. Why not make them clear in the advertising?

The advertising wasn’t for you.  Or for readers of Next Generation. 

What I can't understand is the spending behind a massive PR effort (including an MTV launch) to hype the heck out of something and then not use advertising (with its broad reach and Microsoft’s massive throw weight) to make it all clear.

Now I hope you understand.  The PR did its job.  The ads, and the MTV launch, were all about planting seeds for the future, to help us reach new customers who will buy a year from the launch.  We never had the need to “make it all clear.”  Nobody who has bought an Xbox 360, or will in the near term, is unclear about what the Xbox 360 is. 

My bottom line:

What is the point of this article?  To inform other manufacturers as they craft their product positioning?  To warn Nintendo and Sony that they better frame their launch strategy in light of the Xbox launch? 

Marketing games is a tricky business.  But as marketers in this industry, we have the chance to work with high tech consoles, low cost media, engaged customers, creative concepts and IP, and great working conditions.  We all share a common love of what we do for a living, and we all have (roughly) the same goals: making a living for ourselves while creating and selling something we love.  And we’re lucky to have a strong community of gamers that really love videogames.

It’s easy to pass quick judgment on another company’s marketing.  Heck, I do it myself.  But I can assure you that every argument that’s been made by Vijay, or by anyone else online, has been considered and discussed and debated by the marketers I work with.  And though Vijay might have chosen a different marketing strategy for the Xbox 360 (one with a $100 million advertising spend, advertising that was solely feature/benefit based, naming that includes features and benefits, and a console design that had more colors, buttons, and lights), I can almost guarantee that if he attended the same meetings we have, he’d have made many of the same decisions we did. 

Or maybe not. 

Edelman, Blogs, NYT, and Xbox

All in one story?  The NYT ran a story about called "Wal-Mart Enlists Bloggers in PR Campaign.  Hey, even a nice mention of Xbox outreach to our community!

Others have reached out to bloggers to promote a product or service, as Microsoft did with its Xbox game system and Cingular Wireless has done in the introduction of a new phone.

Edelman does a lot of PR work for Xbox and Games for Windows, and my team works directly with a talented team from Edelman who specialize in online PR and marketing.  So I was interested to see Richard Edelman opine in a blog post called "A Word to the Wise". 

PR firms must be very conscious to abide by some very clear ethical standards, so that we do not compromise bloggers. First, we must always be transparent about the identity of our client and the goal of the PR program. Second, we should ask permission to participate in the conversation, and be comfortable with any communication being made public, whether by the blogger or an investigative journalist. We should support bloggers' transperancy re. the source of their information. Third, we must reveal any financial relationship with bloggers, whether consulting or even reimbursement of trip expenses. Fourth, we must ensure that the information we provide is 100% factually correct and not "spin."

Good advice.