A Day at the Races

Yesterday I went to the races. I (along with most of Melbourne it seemed) was lucky enough to be watching from The Birdcage. There were a number of celebrities there - including Lara Bingle. Now I've commented on Lara's fashion elsewhere, however nothing prepared me for the striking number she was wearing yesterday. As someone said "You could almost see her religion". None-the-less she was very sparky and pleasant. And it was nice of her to pose for a photo with someone so odd looking.

Tortured link to marketing following.

I've written about gambling before - and in particular the concept of variable positive reinforcement. That is rewarding the desired behaviour (in this case gambling) at random times, and with random amounts. It still amazes me that marketers don't use this concept more often. It feels the only time marketers use it is during 'promotions' (something like '1 in every 7 wins'). However, if it's the strongest conditioner of human behavior shouldn't marketers be trying to understand it, and applying it's principles in a slightly more sophisticated way.

The Bastard Child of Social Media

I wrote a piece for The Punch that was uploaded today. The conversation that follows is more interesting than the actual article.

Insight is over-rated: Why 'why' is less important than 'how'

It's about why 'why' does not have all the answers.

The Obsession With 'Emotional Advertising' is Missing the Point

Recently Millward Brown put out a white paper titled "Should my advertising stimulate an emotional response?" I applaud Millward Brown for trying to answer such a question - and the article is a good read, concluding unsurprisingly with 'yes' we should encourage an emotional response. However, to be frank, I think asking a different question would prove to be more useful.

Lately, the advertising industry has been obsessed with 'emotional advertising' and building an 'emotional connection'. However, more progressive agencies are leaving the quest for emotional advertising behind - at a rate of knots. As Alex Bogusky puts it when talking about advertising - "Create something so funny, charming or useful that I can't live without it". In other words the gold bar is no longer 'emotional advertising', but something more meaningful to the consumer (or person).

We now live in a world where there is so much more available to us within the communications framework. Rather than just 'emotional' or 'rational' advertising - we can:

• Make products (e.g. iphone applications) that act as communications.


• Put on experiences (e.g events) that act as communications.


• Provide useful content (e.g. a traffic or finance reports) that acts as communications.


• Create games that act as communications (e.g. The Beatles game to sell more Beatles records).

Though technology, ideas and insight, all communications can now be useful, and worth interacting with - rather than just passively receiving it. And all communications can, if good enough, evoke a direct behavioural response. So why just let people passively receive an emotional message when we can encourage interaction with our brand. Or better yet, give people something of genuine utility that makes their lives better in some small way.

The focus should be on a behavioural response, not an emotional response. the question therefore could become

"Should my advertising stimulate a behavioural response".

Then once you've answered 'Yes' to this the next question is:

"How do I use my advertising to stimulate a behavioural response".

Then, the next question is:

"How do I use my advertising to stimulate a behavioural response that builds my brand?"

It's much harder to create advertising that stimulates a behavioural response, and do this in a genuinely brand building way. However, it has the potential to be significantly more powerful. Once people chose to interact with the brand or message they have invested something of themselves into what you have to say / give.

We are about to see a rapid shift away from 'emotional measures' towards behavioural measures' as the research industry catches up to where (only the progressive) advertising agencies are going.

The Weirdest 'Client' I Ever Had

Just about everyone in the workforce has 'clients' of some description. I used to work for the NSW Department of Corrective Services - where my 'clients' were prison inmates. We used to call them 'clients' as we were providing a service to them, and calling them patients was apparently pathologising them (incidentally during an even more politically correct year or two I think inmates were actually referred to as 'consumers' as they were consuming services!)

Whilst at Corrective Services I remember one particular client very well. He was a young guy with a particularly weird sexual paraphilia - and he used to hang around cemeteries a lot more than he should. He was also very unstable, neurotic, and had an extremely explosive temper.

One time I was interviewing him, and he was becoming increasingly agitated. Half way through the interview he stood up abruptly, walked around my desk, approached me, and then punched a huge hole in the wall right next to my head. Shaken, I told him that he was scaring me. The poor chap then unexpectedly put his head in his hands lurched backwards and burst into tears. He fell into his chair and repeatedly cried how sorry he was, and that he 'always scares people'.

.

I believe he really hated the fact that he scared (and probably hurt) people - myself included. However, he hadn't learned the ability to control his own behaviour.

.

I'm not sure of the purpose of the anecdote but it's something along the lines of this.... people act to the best of their ability, and sometimes - they don't have the skills to act in ways they wish they could.

We Consume To Stand Out While Fitting In

There was a Lee ad that ran in Australia about 5 years ago. It had the tag line 'Stand Out. Fit In.' I really liked it. This is a perennial internal debate people play in their minds when consuming brands. Whatever the category people are playing a balancing act of wanting to fit in, conform and ultimately gain peer acceptance. Whilst also, wanting to stand out, express themselves, and be recognised as an independent being.

This principle is easy to understand in fashion - and leads to tribes of people all looking different from everyone else, but very similar to one another. Goths, Skaters, and Fashionistas are all standing out, yet fitting in. However, the principle can be generalised to other categories and perhaps even applies when we choose meals in a restaurant. For some reason someone felt compelled to study this. At the Journal of Consumer Behaviour a study has found that when we order food in a restaurant in groups we do the following:

1. Tend to seek variety when making initial orders - that is we consider ordering things other people are not.
2. Then we gravitate toward similar choices as others - that is we begin to conform with everyone else.

3. And then, as the group consensus grows, we move away from popular choices and get our own thing anyway.

I love this study, and although sad to say reflects the way I go about choosing meals in a restaurant. The study goes into more detail about what % of people need to consider ordering the same thing before the need to stand out kicks in. However, to read more and ensure I have not misrepresented the original please visit it when published in full as these findings were taken from the press release.

Next time your ordering a meal, or putting on your favourite jeans be sure to ask yourself 'Is this choice going to help me conform, whilst expressing my individuality'.... or perhaps don't!

Lee photo

In Advertising Give Me Utility over Emotion Anytime

Here's my latest Adnews article. It's about Utility Marketing, trying to use every possible opportunity to give people what they want. It's an alternative to the 'emotional ádvertising' thing people talk about (see previous blog posts).

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts.

The Ministry of Muffins

Last year, George Weston Foods, along with Naked Communications, decided to completely transform the ‘Little Bites’ brand. After re-segmenting the market, a significantly larger opportunity for the brand was identified, and a new master brand (The Ministry of Muffins) was created to meet this opportunity. This work has resulted in reformulating the product and improving its nutritional profile, completely redesigning the packaging, and creating an integrated communications campaign.

The Power of Social Media

Over the last three months something interesting has happened to the Sydney radio scene, largely due to the power of social media. One radio station, 94.5 FBI, has been saved. Whereas another, the high profile Kyle and Jackie O show (2Day FM) has been severely wounded.

FBI asked Naked Communications to develop an idea that would encourage their loyal listeners to donate money to save the station. Previous donation drives had had only moderate success and we know from social influence theory that people don’t enjoy backing an ailing cause. Therefore, Naked had the idea to turn the listeners creative capital into financial capital. We encouraged listeners to creatively ‘Ask Richard’ Branson for $1,000,000 – whoever asked him in the most creative way also scored some dollars. Anyway, the creative peoples participation was enough to generate strong PR , Richard Branson called in to the station, people did silly stuff, and the campaign raised over $500,000. That was enough to save the station.

Kyle and Jackie O on the other hand acted in a deplorable, grubby manner. They angered many areas of the community and threw fuel on the fire by refusing to accept responsibility for their actions. Bloggers, and Twitterers demanded action, other media groups joined in, and advertisers listened. I personally participated in this action, and was pleased with the result; a 7 second delay, an investigation instigated, and a reduced public role for a very offensive man. Again, this result was at least partly due to the power of social media.

So what can we take from this?
1. Not all voices are equal: Brands need to find the influential few and invest more time with them .
2. Tap into your lovers passions: People got involved with FBI as we asked them to create inventive ways to release money from Branson, rather than just asking them for money. Don’t ask consumers to just name your product or write an ad (many people would find that boring / trivial) but look at ways they can get involved in ways they want to get involved.
3. Listen before responding: Kyle’s use of social media (The Punch) just inflamed the situation. He did not listen to the audience who was calling for action. His tone was as if he was speaking to his regular all forgiving audience.
4. Use social media: Social media, especially combined with other forms of communications is now even more powerful (through some fancy technological innovations). The FBI campaign cost $0.00, and raised $500,000 over the course of 6 weeks. The financial impact on Kyle was even more staggering.

It’s a neat case study. Two brands, same category, same media spend ($0.00) and with extremely different results. Social media is, as they say ‘hot right now’, and with good reason.

The Brilliance of the Bored

The Brett Rolfe took this photo this morning in Glebe, Sydney. It's very clever. I sickly hope it's part of a marketing campaign - but fear it's to clever for that.

What Marketers Want - In Their Own Words

The attached is an article as it appeared in The Australian on August 3, 2009. Naked Communications and Booz & Company have jointly conducted research looking into the pressures faced by marketers, and how they are responding. This article summarises the findings of the qualitative stage of the study.

Forensic Shopping Investigation II: Shopping For Religion

When I was 16 my friend Cam and I went out one night shopping for a religion. Well, we were not really shopping for a religion, as much as minding our own business when we were accosted by scientologists on the street who coerced us to come inside their 'church'. I remember it very clearly.

Once inside, we were immediately separated, and each asked to fill in a long questionnaire, as they were going to ‘audit’ our personality. After about an hour, questionnaire completed, I was asked to watch a video whilst it was marked. The video had the classic disorienting hypnosis spiral thing, as well as someone espousing the virtues of Scientology. After viewing I went back and got the results from my personality audit. Apparently, I had a very bad personality, and needed a lot of help. At this point I left and waited for my friend (who I had remained separated from). When he finally came out he had bought a book, and signed up for a course after also being told he had a very bad personality. Not a surprising result for an impressionable teen.

It was this early experience that got me interested in religion and cults and the blurring of the line. So last week I went back to The Church of Scientology (COS) to see how their methods had progressed in the intervening 20 years.

I walked past the 'free personality and IQ tests' sign, and into a shabby makeshift building, and asked the shabby lady behind the desk what the COS was all about. Guess what she said? Yes, the classic a) do the personality test, b) watch a video, c) I get the results. Good to see their recruitment methods haven't changed in over 20 years!

I completed the questionnaire and was ushered into a small, black room where I watched a video in surround sound on a very large screen. The video was beyond imaginable cheesy (like a send up of a cult recruitment video). It was hosted by a Ken doll impersonator, and showed lots of well dressed, shiny, white toothed Americans, smiling to camera. It's painful to recite how bad the movie was - pure propaganda, talking up L Ron Hubbard's many achievements (he was "fully proficient in 59 different fields"), and demonstrating the opulent assets of the COS. Just one of the silly quotes was:

"Psychology and psychiatry are proven failures...stone age" (said in a melodramatic voice, by a camp looking professor)

Anyway, bad video. The fun really stops when I got my test results back. Just like last time I am told I have a very bad personality (at least the test shows good test re-test reliability - joke). Diane takes me through my results - you can see the table below. According to the test the three scales that are about 'Me' show that I am completely Unstable, very Depressed, and very Nervous. The scales to do with 'Work' show I'm Active and Aggressive, and totally irresponsible. And the last scales, how I relate to 'Others', show I'm very Critical, and have a Lack of Accord with others. This was Diane's cue to tell me how depressing my life was, and how much I needed help. Any resistance I put up to this was met with - "well your personality shows you are aggressive so of course you are not going to agree." The circular conversation lasted an hour or so, and would have gone on all night if it had to as Diane had one objective only - and that was to make me feel bad about my life so that she could provide the answer and sign me up.

This was not nice, in fact - it was very confronting. She told me her personality was 'Clear' (she had a good one) - but my personality was so bad that it needed "urgent attention". Mainly to get a break from her I asked to take the IQ test. I've always been good at taking IQ tests (this correlates highly with getting good IQ scores) so I knew if the IQ test marked me as a dullard then the whole thing really was bogus. Interestingly the IQ test came back quite high. This made me happy (and smug) but didn't do much for my relationship with Diane. She immediately reminded me of how unhappy I apparently was and insisted I sign up (and pay for) now for a 2 day course happening that weekend. The course was only $135.00. Bait.

Anyway, I used the tried and tested excuse of having to talk it over with my wife before I signed (see Forensic Shopping I) and at 10.30pm I emotionally limped my way out of there. Thoughtful Diane gave me a personality questionnaire to give my wife so she could find out how unhappy she was as well.

In short, I felt pressured and attacked. I was made to feel bad about my lfe so that they could then supply the answer. The recruitment techniques they used are tired and corny. Further, it felt to me like there was a lot of evidence of cult like behaviours as outlined in Raphael Aaron's book called 'Cults: Too Good To Be True'. For example:

1. Language loading: Changing language to make it unique to the cult (i.e. 'clear' and 'auditing')
2. Demand for Purity: You're in or your out, and if you're out you're wrong. In their own words if you don't do Scientology it's your choice but "...it's a stupid choice. You can also jump off a bridge or blow your brains out".
3. Confession: Admitting something bad that's happened to you. This promises to set you free but in effect binds you to the group (They really wanted to know about the loss that happened dusing my childhood!)
4. Doctrine over person: Their worship of L Ron Hubbard
5. Sacred Science: The belief that their belief is right for all humanity

Also, for the record I'm a relatively happy, stable and calm person (albeit a little weird). I've taken many scientifically validated psychological tests in the past (through training, and professional interest) and all point to a significantly different personality profile than the one suggested by the COS. I believe the personalty test they offered was designed purely to make oneself feel bad about their current life.

It must be said I came into this shopping investigation with an open mind, yet also a preconceived notion of what COS may be like. So, to provide some genuine objectivity to the situation the good (and rigorous) people at Auspoll, put some questions forward to 1,500 Australians representative of the general population. They found that 85% of Australians do not believe the COS is a real religion.

Further, 76% agree it's a 'money making scam' (only 4% disagree with this statement), whilst 89% disagree (or strongly disagree) that it's a good religion to join.

So there you have it. After my experience I would avoid the COS if at all possible. I would read up on cults, and I would look at websites such as Wikipedia or Operation Clambake (so named as L Ron Hubbard believes that man evolved from clams!) The Scientologists' website is here and offers a different perspective. Looking for a religion to buy/join feels even more potentially dangerous than trying to cure penile dysfunction. The only person I've found who educates well on the subject is the man who married me (to my wife), Father Bob McGuire. If you're in a cult (or know someone who is) and want out, then contact Raphael Aaron at Cult Counselling Australia.

This was the second in a series of Forensic Shopping Investigations.

Thoughts on These Ads?

I really like these ads. I imagine young guys would like them, read them, and potentially even take in the message. What do you think?

Aspiration versus Authenticity in Advertising

Saw this billboard for Kayser undies in Melbourne last night - and took the photo (with my Blackberry from the passenger seat of our car). Each one of these girls is supposed to represent a different body shape; Column, Pear, Apple, and Hourglass. It's a simple idea - 'we have undies for all body shapes', but is it just me or do these four bodies all look very, very similar (tall, toned, skinny and model like)? However, instead of showing the actual body shapes the skinny models are all holding literal examples of the body shape they are meant to have i.e. the 'pear' girl is holding a pear - but does not really have a 'pear shaped' body.

Getting the balance right between authenticity and aspiration is always difficult - and I would be interested in peoples reactions to this attempt? Do people really want to see 'reality' in underwear advertising, or is it acceptable to have aspirational portrayals of various body shapes? Is it cheating using the objects next to each body type instead of showing real versions of each? Thoughts?

PS: We were off to see a film called My Suicide as part of MIFF Well worth seeing if you get the chance.

Kyle and Jackie O: Some Suggestions on How to Remove Them From The Airwaves

I have written an open letter to the advertising and media industry asking for Kyle and Jackie O to be removed from the airwaves. Many people have written in and left comments, some of which have urged others to take action. Below is a list of activities people have suggested you can do to express your support:

• You can view my open letter and make comments here
• You can make a complaint to 2Dayfm here
• You can make a complaint to Austereo here
• You can join a twitter protest at #optus #stopsponsoringaustereo
• You can join a Facebook group protesting against Kyle and Jackie O to be on the air (there are many - but) here's just one
• many people also suggest contacting the sponsors of the show directly.

...and so on.

Just received an update from Twitter and Mumbrella that they have just been taken off the air. Well done to those who find their behaviour reprehensible and expressed their thoughts.

Bad Spelling and Grammar

This morning I received the following comment on a post:

Hi Adam,I am an avid reader of your blog and love everything you write on branding. However, in virtually all your posts you mix up 'to' and 'too' which detracts from the quality of your writing. 1) should be 'too' big 2) should be 'too' quickly. I know it's a silly/minor thing, but I always notice it and feel that a consumer psychologist making complex observations should have mastered simple grammar.I hope you see this as helpful and not narky, as I genuinely enjoy your blog.

To the person who wrote this - thank you. I agree with you. My terrible spelling and grammar detracts from everything I write on this blog. Unfortunately, I never listened much at school and many of the learned skills in grammar / spelling passed me by as I was staring out the window. Further Blogger only has basic word processing tasks.

I will make more of an effort but unfortunately cannot guarantee it wont happen again (and again and again). I did read a study once that said that neither of these acquired skills are correlated with intelligence - and I hold onto that thought tightly!

Now can I ask of you that in future you don't post anonymously - it's not you is it Mike?

Why Bogans Kyle and Jackie O Should Be Off The Air

Everyone has a right to freedom of speech. However, society would be nicer if those who had the loudest voices did not represent everything base, banal, pathetic and sad about humanity. Kyle and Jackie O are harmful. Kyle is a misogynist and Jackie O has such a high need for approval she'll go along with everything the bully does with a pathetic 'Oh Kyle you can't do that. Te hee'.

Why do I care? I care because having people like this on the air is condoning the dysfunctional opinions they spit out every day. They make our society unpleasant / ugly / harmful. To catch up on their latest 'antics' go here.

What they both did to the 14 year old was disgraceful, putting her (and her exploited mother) in that position in the first place was damaging. However, Kyle's response that he just 'panicked' was equally sad. Pushing someone to the edge of a cliff and then panicking when they nearly fall is a little.... convenient. Further, the words he chose to say when the girl disclosed she had been raped were 'is that the only experience you've had' indicate that Kyle condones rape and sees it as just another form of sexual activity. His explanation today that it was a 'weird' experience was equally telling. it was weird as Kyle was perhaps confronted with his own dysfunctional thoughts. For a man who apparently lacks any insight - this would have been very confronting indeed.

Kyle and Jackie O have a right to say what they like - I urge people not to listen. Better yet, I urge Kyle and Jackie O to have a look at their own behaviour and politely remove themselves from the airwaves.

A Drink with Chuck Porter

In the world of advertising there are unfortunately, not a lot of people to admire. I don't like most of the advertising I'm exposed to (does anyone?). However some of the stuff Crispin Porter + Bogusky have done is the exception. Their work for Microsoft, Burger King and others has been interesting, playful, cool, and most importantly... effective.

We had drinks with Chuck Porter tonight and here are a few things shared:

1. Fruit hampers can be to big: The one delivered to Chuck's hotel was to big so he gave us a pineapple (picture above)

2. Crispin Porter has 1000+ people

3. Everyday he gets across all of the work the agency is doing. He believes the work is as good now as it ever was. Therefore he's happy with how the agency is going.

4. Crispin Porter does not have a table tennis table or pinball machine. They believe in hard work.

5. The world now moves to quickly to have a long term strategic plan.

He didn't disappoint. Chuck was impressive, intelligent and a nice guy to have a beer with.

How Advertisers Treat Women

This is the funniest / saddest commentary I've seen on advertising for quite a while. It was sent to me this morning. The clip speaks volumes.

How to Spot a Fake Psychologist

There was an article in The Age this morning about a guy pretending to be a psychologist. He is now facing 357 charges. Within the world of marketing there are a number of people who refer to themselves as psychologists who are not actually registered. If seeing a psychologist find out if a) they are registered, and b) if in Australia if they are a member of The Australian Psychological Society (APS).

Why Good Advertising Must Begin To Embrace The Dark Side

There has been a new study released that shows that ads depicting positive emotion are no more effective than those depicting negative emotions (I could only find the release). That is. please question why you keep showing smiley, happy, cheesy Prozac propped housewives serving up dinner (or KFC) to the family of four in your ads. Advertising agencies (and marketers) need to better understand what really works - and why. People are well and truly over the fake happy world of advertising. The world has moved on.

The research goes on to say that it is the level of interest in the communications that often plays a significant role in advertising effectiveness. If interested in the communications exploring 'negative' emotions such as bittersweet nostalgia, guilt, and anxiety. Sadvertising has also been explored here.

Tapping into the dark side of human emotion, empathising with how people really feel, and normalising some of these negative feelings can have a much stronger impact on brand building communications than the shiny, happy people parroting the happy scripts we see so often. I have written previously about it here, here, and here,

As an aside, reading about scientifically validated principles of consumer behaviour, with their predictive validity, is a nice alternative to reading after-the-fact-it's-all-positive case studies.

Why We Like To Pay More for Beer, Art and Prostitutes

An interesting article in Psychology Today asks 'Is a $5,000.00 prostitute worth it? The answer - quite possibly. The article goes on to talk about price-placebo effect. In a nutshell the more we pay, the better we think it's going to be, and the more effectively we expect it to deliver. This could be why it's not unreasonable for Australian Medical Institute (AMI) to charge $4000.00+ for a nasal spray - they are hoping (I guess) that a placebo effect kicks in.

We are reassured by price especially for categories that are subjective and complex - art, wine, beer, fashion etc. Stella Artois built their entire global brand positioning around the price placebo - 'Reassuringly Expensive'. Greater understanding of the placebo effect, and better understanding of what drives quality in various categories may help people hold on to their money - and not just spend for that reassuring feeling.

Finally, I've always said it's always much easier to raise your prices than lower them. Raising the price of something communicates to consumers it's popular, improving, experiencing increased demand. Lowering the price is a one way street, and a quick way to kill it.

I am a sucker for price placebo's just about every day. You?

New York Post's Take on Johnny Depp's Cool Factor

The New York Post has written a comprehensive piece on Johnny Depp, how cool he is, and how cool you can be. The article features some of our learnings on cool. It is obviously written to partly promote his new feature film - and bless the Post for doing their bit to promote it.

If you're interested in Johnny Depp you'll be interested in the article - if you're not you wont. If you want to measure your own coolness use our Facebook App. In a world where everyone is getting their 15 minutes of fame it's interesting how people such as Depp can be enduring aspirational figures to so many. Understanding enduring popularity (through cool or otherwise) is something that most brand owners should be interested in, as it's what, in many cases they are trying to achieve.

Forensic Shopping: My Experience Getting Treatment for Erectile Dysfunction at Australian Medical Institute (AMI)

You may have heard of Australian Medical Institute (AMI), with the infamous 'Longer lasting sex' ads. They've also been the subject of a series of reports from Fairfax papers to do with their 'patented' technology, and disputes as to the effectiveness of their treatments. Intrigued, and with my manhood in tact under the guise of a Forensic Shopping Investigation I set off to find what really lay behind the controversy. The following is a personal account of what happens if you go to AMI.

I arrived the morning of my appointment feeling quite nervous and embarrassed. The clinics feel like they are completely demountable - very temporary, like they could just disappear one day and be gone with out a trace (but with a lot of money). There are five stages to a visit to AMI:

1. The Waiting room: With a sagging tree in the corner of the room acting as a metaphor for the patients problems and seating for 20 I waited for a few minutes before being ushered into the first of three rooms I would visit. Here I met Greg, the clinic nurse.

2. The Clinic Nurse: Greg is an older, overweight bearded 'nurse'. He asks me if I'm related to Noel Ferrier before hurriedly asking (and answering) a number of questions 'You get enough sleep do you? Good'. Before moving onto the next question. After a few minutes he's finished the preliminary questions and takes my blood pressure. He then explains it's fine as the "top number is bigger than the bottom number". Then we get to the real issue - clenching his right fist holding his bent arm upright in his left hand he says "When you are 20 you have the holy grail of erections - a 100% erection". He says this whilst repeatedly banging his right elbow into the cup of his left hand as if to really make the point that a 100% erection is like the fisted arm of an adult male pointing up to the ceiling. He then asks "If this is 100% what percent are your erections?". I answer, "Ummm about 50%". He probes if there are any other issues with my love life and I let him know that despite of my inability to get a firm erection I also prematurely ejaculate, lasting at best around 1 minute (as I was saying this it occurred to me that this condition must be medically impossible - but it didn't worry Greg). Greg hurriedly tells me AMI can help and I am now going to speak to the doctor.

Speaking to the doctor involved Greg picking up the cordless phone on his desk, dialing the number (he had to try 3 times) and handing me the phone. 'Don't forget to ask about side effects" Greg helpfully says, handing me the phone "...it's always good to ask about the side effects".

3. The Doctor's Phone Call: The doctor is on the line and says to me "Hi Adam I have discussed your case with the nurse (this couldn't be right as I've only just arrived and been with Greg the overweight bearded nurse the whole time). He says he has the perfect treatment - 'the nasal delivery spray". (the other options are lozenges, a needle, or a cream to rub into the penis). I asked about the side effects as recommended and he said "It can make the nose a bit numb for a while". I also asked how my treatment would change if I only had one issue (not two contradictory issues) - the Doctor didn't answer coherently. Instead he chose to focus on the fact that I was 'getting two treatments in one really'. The Doctor seemed to think I was a good candidate for the nasal spray and after a 60 second phone call hung up. I was then ushered by Greg to meet... the natropath.

4. The Natropath: The natropath, this time an older, dithery man, again asked if I was related to Noel Ferrier? then told me that I should exercise more and drink less. He also told me I will need "the vitamins", as they are natural and good for me. Unfortunately he was confused as to how the vitamins worked and kept getting the terms parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system mixed up. Nor could he explain how the vitamins worked with the nasal spray. I doubt he had any qualifications - I was actually too embarrassed (for him) to ask. After 10 stilted minutes talking utter nonsense he then ushered me into the third room where I met the Clinic Head (although please don't think in any way this was a clinic).

5. The Clinic Head: From what I can gather this is the sales salesperson. Her name was Eve (no Noel Ferrier? this time, but a "You're Adam - guess what, my name is Eve!!") and her job was to not let me leave without signing up. This meeting was significantly longer - around 30 minutes, compared to the 20 minutes I had spent in total with the nurse (9 minutes), doctor (1 minute) and natropath (10 minutes). Eve tells me my life will be better, and I will be much happier with the treatment. She tells me that I am extremely lucky to have come in and that they have a special offer on. She tells me the vitamins are like "a gift really" (although I have to pay). After a while we get to price - it took some convincing but I asked her to write the costs down so I can compare. You can see the costs on the post-it note I've scanned in (below). The cost is an incredible $4,655.00 for an 18 month treatment (this includes the vitamins which as it turns out is a bottle of multi-vitamins and a bottle of anti-oxidants). Alternatively, without the vitamins it's $3,995.00. I say I need to talk it over with my wife, this upsets Eve. Further, she does not have any pamphlets or any information written down about the clinic so that I can talk it over with my wife. A check on the AMI website reveals nothing of substance either. Nothing written down. No sales material. Nothing but a post-it (it would be funny if it wasn't so serious).

Post-it note in hand I leave, promising to call back today. As I leave I pass half a dozen sheepish looking guys in the waiting room.

Whilst at AMI I was not offered any form of medical explanation for any of the treatments, nor was I provided with any evidence that the treatment would work. Further, it was my impression that they had only one form of treatment for any presenting problem (erectile dysfunction or premature ejaculation). Little consideration was given to lifestyle or psychological causation. I have no idea if the nasal delivery 'treatment' is effective, but I am guessing it's not. I will let the experience above speak for itself.

This business appears to target the vulnerable. It offers 'hope in a nasal spray' for people who have sexual health issues. Further, I believe it pathologises what in many cases are normal heath conditions. AMI highlights that when the psychological need is great, and there is a lack of education in the market, then people will be willing to believe anything (with absolutely no supporting evidence). The pseudo-scientific experience was aimed at getting people to emotionally commit to the sale before the price is ever mentioned. The sales process is intense and everything possible is done for an on the spot sale.

I strongly suggest that if you are suffering from any form of sexual dysfunction you visit your local GP, or psychologist as a first port of call.

This is the first in a series of Forensic Shopping Investigations.

Beer Advertising: Everything Old is New Again

Something interesting is happening in the world of beer advertising in Australia. It is acting as microcosm of the communications landscape. There are two schools of thought battling it out for supremacy, and the old guard appears to be making a comeback.

Creating Culture: Take a brand, understand your consumer and build an entertaining form of culture around something your consumer already loves. The idea builds and morphs as the campaign develops - growing as the community around it embraces the idea. Some obvious examples are Lion Nathan's. XXXX Gold's Beach Cricket, and Toohey's Extra Dry's 6 Degrees films around the world.

Creating Ads: Take a brand and create a 'big ad'. Spend loads of production, and talk about how much you've spent and how long the shoot was as a tease. Then boom launch the ad (with at least a 60) and wow the hell out people. Support the film with other media like a website, or some social media. Some examples are Fosters Carlton Draughts Big Ad series, and the soon to be released VB's multi million dollar ad.

It's interesting that even with so many brand building tools in the tool box it appears that people are still happy to reach for the trusty, bloody big hammer that has hammered the message home so effectively in the past. It will be fascinating watching how these brands battle it out for market share over the next few years.

Finally, as an aside I don't understand why a brand such as VB would give up their end iconic end line 'For a hard earned thirst'. It's a move that no doubt would have been sold as being 'brave', and 'progressive'. However, that line clearly articulated the brand promise, and role that brand played in peoples lives (whether it was literal or aspirational everyone from a tradey to an entrepreneur still wants to feel like they've put in a hard days effort if they are drinking the 'reward''). Were there not any other ways they could have moved the brand on without getting rid of this iconic statement? I'm intrigued to know what they've changed it to. Hope the decision was strategically led, and wish them luck. It's quite a challenge.