Conference 7.286::digital

    Hee hee! Relatively new to DEC? You'll learn.
    
    (Sorry if you're a long-term DECcie, you don't sound like one!)
    
    
    
    
    More seriously, our advertising is probably a good topic for
    ASIMOV::MARKETING.
    
    - ���

This 'Golden Rathole' has been gone down many times before in the
ASIMOV::MARKETING conference. Try posting your note there.

Lee

    "New-to-DEC" = anybody here less than 5 years

    ditto, on dec's commercials. where is the pizzaz and spark. i'd
    love to see dec sponsor a tennis or golf match on sat. or sun.
    afternoon many exec's are watching then. why even bowling (yetch!!!)
    may be ok.
    
    hy
    
    

    Hey Hey Hey watch the bowling puns. But I to agree DEC s lack of
    advertising is only matched by its advertising. YUK Yuk Yuk.

    
    
    they use F1 racing in Europe.
    
    They sponser a car....., also they sponsered some sort of race (not F1),
    a couple of years ago one of the cars went right thru the DEC sign.....
    
    Now that was impressive :-)
    
    Lou

	was "sponsored" by DEC, "The Official Computer Vendor to the NBA".
However, I just caught one of the segment intros, and didn't watch enough of it
to see if we had a commercial.  All the team placards had the logo on them!

	Anyone see a DEC commercial spot Tuesday?  Anyone else WATCH??? :>)

New-to-DEC: anyone who joined "Digital".

- greg

    .8   I watched it.  Digital was mentioned a number of times,
    but I don't recall any commercials about DEC.  The logo was
    prominent as the camera moved about the hall.

    If only digital will hire the agency who does NYNEX Yellow Pages

    Or the people who do the continuing sagas for New England
    Telephone.....  I can see it now....
    
    "Will Luke and his brother finally VAXmail each other?"
    
    

	  There was a DEC commercial during the NBA draft. It
	featured John Thompson, Georgetown basketball coach, and the
	CEO of Kodak. I thought it over-long, and I don't like John
	Thompson. ("The only USA Olympic Basketball coach to bring
	home the bronze.") So, it didn't get me to buy anything. 8^)

	Roy

    I'd like to see a "personality" associated with our ads.Unlike the
    Chaplin figure in the IBM commercials, someone who is respectable,
    and not pitiable would be my preference. I could go for one of the
    following:
    
              1) Dick Cavett (he once did Apple commercials?)
    
              2) Carl Sagan  (maybe too techie!)
    
              3) John Glenn  (the Senator- conflict of interest?)
    
    Any other personalities that would present us in a postive light?
    
    Steve
    
    
    

    If you want to see a really GOOD Digital TV ad, it'll cost you a
    couple of hours and a couple of bucks.
    
    Rent "The Philadelphia Experiment" - a semi-sci-fi movie about an
    experiment-gone-wrong during the 2nd world war.  A guy transports
    to the future-for-him, present of about '82 when then movie was
    made.  Watch or fast forward until the guy is in a motel room watching
    TV and watch his TV.
    

    Digital Canada has a good commercial on these days on Cdn TV.
    
    A futuristic "contest" with three male / female couples and a referee
    or sage of sorts. Picture a "Star Trek" like episode with everbody
    in robes & robettes 8^). THe challenge: remove the gold ring from
    the center podium without stepping on the carpet surrounding it
    for about 6 feet in radius. Group 1 tries - man stretches across
    carpet and loses grip and falls on carpet. Group 2 join hands, woman
    stretches across carpet, held by man, grip breaks, failed attempt.
    Group 3 - walk up to carpet, roll it up, step up to podium,
     and remove gold ring.
    
    Voice over Logo on screen - "You'll like our way of thinking."                                                
                                 
    I liked it.
    
    Scooter

    RE.17
    So can you tell us what was on the TV?
    RE.18
    I saw that ad on a Windsor station and I too liked it!

    I read in yesterdays Wall St. Journal that IBM is starting anew
    PS/2 based ad campaign. Lets face it IBM is a "MARKETING" based
    company and we are not. The print ad's were unique. The tv campaign
    is very, MTVish, How you gonna do it PS/2 it, MicroChannel solves
    your worst nightmare approach. I am eager to see this campaign.
    
    Keep in mind this is just a campaign to sell IBM and PS/2's. If
    I was John Sculley and APPLE I would be nervous. 
    
    Ed

re:    <<< Note 847.18 by TRCO01::FINNEY "Keep cool, but do not freeze ..." >>>

	Scooter, That sounds GREAT! Do you have any idea how we in the States
	can get a hold of a tape of it to see it? Also, what types of shows
	do we advertise on north of the border?

	-Jack

I wouldn't worry if I was Sculley.  Any IBM ad that mentions MicroChannel is
selling technology.  Apple doesn't sell that.  Digital ads, if they sell
anything :( sell coordination across an enterprise.  Apple doesn't sell that.

Apple ads sell Apple's product, which is Personal Empowerment.

    >>Scooter, That sounds GREAT! Do you have any idea how we in the
    >>States can get a hold of a tape of it to see it?
      
    
    I'll wander upstairs to themarketing types and see if I can scamb
    a copy, barring that, I'll record it some evening.
    
    >>Also, what types of shows
    >>       do we advertise on north of the border?
    
    Public TV like TV Ontario (educational channel), Family shows
    (like the Under the Big Top - a Circus Show) and the Journal, a
    newsmagazine after the evening news, prime time on CBC, and a few
    other docunews and newsmagazine programs on CBC.
    
    Scooter 

    
    The non-US DEC subsidiaries have a relatively free hand in marketing,
    and seem to have done a good job with advertising (non-yawner TV
    spots and F1 racing, etc.)
    
    Perhaps with the new, more agressive stance we are taking in the
    US, things will improve.
    
    re. 17 - I have LOTS of respect for KO, but please don't put him
    in front a camera for a TV commercial. Egads...
    
    /ljj

    re .-1
    
    If only it was true.  In SPR these are the computer companies I
    can remember who advertise on TV:
    
    	IBM
    	Apple
    	Xerox
    	Unisys
    	Tandem
    	Wang
    	Commodore
    	Amstrad
    	Prime
    	Toshiba
    	
    These are just the ones I can think of.  Notice a certain large
    player not on the list?
                            
    The Xerox ad was a stunning display of (dare I say it) networking
    integration.  Change the labels and it could have been anybody -
    but the masses are left in no doubt.  We should steal it.  Immediately.

    I think we need some thing tough and hard-hitting, like the AT&T
    commercials. I suggest hiring Michael Douglas and the set from 
    "Wall Street"...
    
    [Douglas as Gordon Gekko in his posh post-modern downtown Manhattan
     office]
    
    "Look, these PC's aren't worth a pile of dog-do. Give me a VAX-6000
    series and DECnet anyday; machines that have networking; machines that
    can be clustered. You know why MIS managers at the Fortune 500
    companies keep replacing their mainframes every two years? Cause
    they're sheep and sheep get slaughtered. Look, buddy, I've got 10
    analysts writing CICS code. I don't need another one. You wanna run
    spreadsheets? Get a PC. You wanna integrate your enterprise. Get a VAX.
    
    

    Ref: .26
    
    Douglas as Gekko, etc.  I love it.  In this hard hitting and VERY
    competitive market, we have to change our way of thinking and get
    our name, product, and advanced technologies far out front.  I know
    we are great, you know we are great, BUT DO THEY KNOW WE ARE GREAT?
    						^^^^
    
    .......... Suchindran

       
       
       	Who's the audience for these commercials? Are we set up to handle
       the influx from alot of advertising?
       
       						mike
       					(Playing devils advocate)

    	Re: .28  (mike)
    
    	   Sure we are.  Didn't you read all the notes concerning the 
    	retraining of 4000+ people.  And Sales is the area they are
    	looking to move them, right?  Why not find ways to advertise 
    	Digital in the US and get people asking us questions!  Gee, with
    	that many people, a good ad campaign that reaches not only the
    	bigger business/customers, we could reach the smaller customer
    	as well.  Why shouldn't Ma & Pa have a small computer to do the
    	family business on?  The people we are going to redeploy have
    	the technical skills and abilities to talk to these people too.
    	Could be the a very profitable venture ... if we felt like being
    	adventerous.
    
    	   The customer potential is there.  The market is so wide open
    	and we've barely touched on the surface.  With our aim being to 
    	include services more and more with our systems, we should be 
    	able to sell to anyone needing a computer!!!  I even got a flyer
    	from Digital that was wanting me to buy a computer.  It listed 
    	something along the lines of 4 different types.
    
    	   Yea, we can do it!  So why aren't we???
    
    	   Vicki

       RE: .29
       
       	"So why aren't we?"
       
       	Cuz our Sales organization isn't geared up to handle Ma & Pa. Our
       current sales force is geared up to only make the big sales TODAY
       rather than starting up a small company now and making bigger
       sales tomorrow. Until we can do both, then I don't see alot of
       sense in advertising only to have Sales not call them back cuz they
       only want one VS3100.  Who knows, maybe our management will train
       the 4000 people to handle this segment of the market?? I hope so.
       It's an untapped future.
       
       							mike

    
    RE.17
      .19
    
    I was just thinking of The Philidelphia Experiment, rented it about a
    week ago.
    
    The commercial features 'The Rainbow, from Digital Equipment
    Corporation.' huh.  I saw the movie when it first came out, it
    didn't click then, I was in college, and had never heard of 
    Digital, or DEC.  Sure, I had used a VAX, I also used a CYBER, a
    HP and a CV system, and worked part-time at HP.  Digital was not 
    on my top ten list of companies to work for, not until about 6 
    months prior to graduation when I met some DECies.  
    
    	Then it became THE company to work for!!!
    
    Digital definitely needs to expose who and what we are, Digital needs
    to become a household name, like IBM.
    
    Honestly, some people still think (I know this will be hard for some
    of you to take)
    
    
    	that 'Digital' makes digitial watches (which are a pretty neat idea).

    Let's advertise a lot on TV, and get our name around, and then we'll
    get lots of walk-in business from folks wanting one or two low end
    systems.. we can set up a small retail-type store at each location..
    we can call them 'Business Centers'.
    
    karl

    From "Printout" ( A Digital Equipment of Canada Employee Publication),
    June 1989.
    
    
    DIGITAL CANADA ADS WIN EIGHT AWARDS IN ADVERTISING COMPETITIONS
    
    Digital's various Canadian advertising campaigns are among the best,
    according to Canadian and international advertising professionals.
    Digital's ads captured eight awards this spring, including the ultimate
    prize, the "Clio" award. Digital Canada'a first television commercial,
    "The Challenge of the Brass Ring", was awarded with a "Best" in
    the Equipment/Computer category in the annual Clio competition.
    
    This year's Clio competition drew 27,000 entries from around the
    world. the Equipment/Computer category is the third largest, after
    Cars and Alcoholic beverages. Digital's ad beat the only other entry
    that came close, an ad created for Apple Australia.
    
    Each entry is judged strictly on its creative merit by a panel of
    judges which includes copywriters, artists, directors and producers
    representing the international advertising industry.
    
    ( article continues to describe future plans for use of the ad,
    plus awards received from the Toronto Star newspaper for marketing
    and recruitment ads.)
                                                             
    Clio awards (International)
    
    "The Challenge of the Brass Ring" (TV)	Best : Equipment/Computer
    
    
    Bessie awards (Canadian)						
    
    "The Challenge of the Brass Ring" (TV)	Gold : Business Eqpt
    
    						       and Services 
    Toronto Star Awards
     
    "Leaders in Industry" (Newspaper)  		    2 Silver Stars
    "Introducing your Next Career Move" (Newspaper) Silver Star
    "Relationship Selling" (Newspaper)		    Award of Merit
    Recruitment Ad for Software Personnel for
    	Digital Hong Kong (Newspaper)		    Gold Star                                       
    						    Silver Star (Best
    							use of spot
    							colour in a
    							magazine)
                               
    Scooter                                                      

Re: .34
    
    Before everyone rushed up north to spend the entire summer indoors
    watching television in anticipation of our ad, offered for your
    consideration is a personal review of the award-winning ad written
    shortly after viewing and long before awards night.
    
    Perhaps the advertising industry has been re-populated with young
    people, and those who are unaware of history are condemned... etc.
    
    
================================================================================
Note 8.0                  Digital Canada's Christmas Ad               No replies
CGOO01::DTHOMPSON                                    42 lines  28-DEC-1988 10:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         So the fear and trepidation were, to some extent, unwarranted.  So 
         were the precautions - the special bags (courtesy, Air Canada) and 
         the closed-room screening.
         
         The ballet was, well, a ballet.  Sorry, y'all, but I was listening 
         to my new Randy Travis disc and warn't inclined to give a passel 
         of time to high-falutin' city slicker stuff.  So 'twas taped.  
         It's really great how fast VHS lets you scan stuff recorded at EP 
         speed.  It took less than ten minutes to motor past the pas'es to 
         the message from our sponsors.
         
         As to the message, well, we're a bit inexperienced at such things, 
         so perfection shouldn't be expected.
         
         One may presume the reference to a base-metal ring was thrown in 
         to ensure the support of Mr. Olsen.  [Please don't go on and on 
         about the symbolism of the brass ring.  I am aware.]
         
         I presume the intent was to suggest an image of Digital as a 
         different and innovative company.  Perhaps nice thoughts, but...
         
         The subtle messages - which advertising types will admit are the 
         more powerful - invoke an image of Digital as cute, clever to the 
         point of trickiness, and with a painfully elitist attitude.
         
         The ad did little to promote the more traditional corporate 
         strengths of engineering, networking, and practical, enjoyable 
         computing.  
         
         The final message: "You'll Like Our Thinking", done in snotty 
         copperplate text which overly emphasizes the word 'Our', is 
         unoriginal and twenty years out of date - remember the 'Lateral 
         Thinking' book of '68, and IBM's 'Think' motto.  
         
         There was, perhaps, more truth in the ad than intended.  The 
         sophistic innuendo and clear reflection of the inwardly focused, 
         self-serving attitude Digital Canada presents to its customers was 
         particularly revealing.
         
         This ad said: "Look, look.  See me. See me be cute.  See me be 
         smart."  and was directed straight at CMC.  It had nought to tell 
         our customers.  That may well have been deliberate.
                                                  

    re .32
    
    Digital is not now a household word, at least not nearly to the extent
    that IBM or yes even APPLE is a household word designating computers.
    
    When I first joined Digital, I had just moved into a house in the
    greater Detroit area.  The neighbor across the street came over to
    introduce himself, told me that he was a *manager* for 25 years in 
    one of the Ford factories locally.  Then he asked what I did.  Swelling
    my chest a bit, I told him I was into computers and I worked for
    Digital.  He said very seriously:
    
    "Must be a damn good company.  I got one of your watches, keeps the
    best time in the world".
    
    At first I thought he must have been kidding, but he was serious. Even
    showed me the watch...
    
    Just had to throw that in ... now back to our normal discussion...
    Jon

    re: .35 (Don)
    
    Yeah, but yer jes an ol' cynic from Calgary, and grumpy after all
    that flyin, to boot ! ;^)
    
    Scooter

    re the Digital Canada commercial:

    I seem to remember similar ads for some other company.  Maybe it was
    a New York bank?  I agree with DTHOMPSON.  It's cute, but it's not
    Digital.

    Well, I guess you can cast about for what "is" Digital. It seems
    that the complaints here and in other places lament the very lack
    of exposure. So fine.
    
    In the mean time, this ad has gained a fair amount of attention,
    all of it positive, from news reports of the competitions to exposure
    on prime time tv during family viewing programs.
    
    Cute or not, its a damn sight more effective than nothing.
    
    Scooter

    How about a direct frontal attack on an IBM ad-
    
    Older type asleep on a pillow that says I*M, clock says about 1:00
    am.  cut to-
    
    younger, go getter on a VAX/DECstation with a design-spreadsheet-etc,
    screen flashes an 'update' and he says " Aha, that should save the
    company xxx million!"
    
    Digital logo and voiceover - "you may be able to sleep secure with
    other systems, but you move ahead with Digital"
    
    
    	-Barry-
    

    If the authors of "Ultimate Entrepreneur" are correct, then I doubt any
    ad highlighting a spreadsheet would get past KO.  He has low regard for
    them.
    
    Marge

re .40:

    Some folks from Public Relations gave a talk to our group.  They said
    that criticizing the competition is a no-no.

    Re .42 (Gerald):
    
    _Criticizing_ the competition is a sign of nonprofessionalism. 
    Pointing out that, say, our product is the best in the field isn't.
    For a news release, saying something like, "The MicroVAX 2000 system
    outperformed every comparably priced and configured competitive
    system," _if true_ and backed by data, isn't criticizing the competition.
    If someone in a news release or ad is quoted as saying, "The VAXstation
    3100 workstation is the most flexible and cost-effective system
    on the market," _that_ isn't criticizing the competition.  A quote
    is someone's opinion (if it really can be attributed to the quotee).
    
    On the other hand, saying "If you don't by a MicroVAX 3800 dual-host
    system, but instead by [brand X], you'll be in _deep_ trouble,"
    that _is_ a no-no, from a standpoint of professionalism.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    i started this, let me re-ask the question (i've been away on vacation,
    see...) is our low-key advertising intentional?
    
    i'll give you an example of low-key:
    
    	our local paper, the Hartford Courant, recently had a 15 (yes,
    15) page article on the announcement of ibm's officevision product.
    one sentence buried in the article quoted some dec person regarding
    our decwindows product and that it had been available for some time.
    that's it.  ibm got tens of thousands of words written about its
    new product in a paper that has a seven-digit circulation - we got
    11 words. 
    
    clever marketing and advertising people can work the news media
    to their advantage - i'm sure dec has people with such
    backgrounds/skills.  are we holding them back?  
    
    again, do we puposely keep a low-key public image?
    

    
    Some gurus on the art of winning and keeping customers make the
    argument that communications to customers, and the customers'
    perception of the content of those communications, are as equally
    important as the actual product or service, and advantages and benefits
    perceived by the customers after using the product or service.
     

    Re .44
    
    >i'll give you an example of low-key:
    >
    >	our local paper, the Hartford Courant, recently had a 15 (yes,
    >15) page article on the announcement of ibm's officevision product.
    >one sentence buried in the article quoted some dec person regarding
    >our decwindows product and that it had been available for some time.
    >that's it.  ibm got tens of thousands of words written about its
    >new product in a paper that has a seven-digit circulation - we got
    >11 words. 
     
    I haven't seen the paper in question, but a 15-page _article_ (that
    is, something written by newspaper folk) on any one product, or
    product group, is astonishing.  What was the context? An interview
    with an IBM person?  Or an IBM end user?  Or a discussion of office
    automation?
    
    If it were an advertising insert, I'd be surprised if we got 11
    words.
    
    >clever marketing and advertising people can work the news media
    >to their advantage - i'm sure dec has people with such
    >backgrounds/skills.  are we holding them back?  
     
    There here is a confusion between the Advertising and Public Relations
    functions.  Advertising is a discipline that provides a direct avenue
    of communication to potential customers: the advertiser writes the
    copy and pays to have it printed (or telecast) in the appropriate
    place in the publication (or broadcast at the appropriate time slot).
    Public Relations is a discipline where its practitioners develop
    news stories that are released to the media for use as _news items_;
    this means that they have to be filtered through reporters and editors,
    who do not have to take them as gospel.  An editor receiving a news
    release, say, is under no obligation whatsoever to run it, either
    intact, or edited -- or modified, for that matter.  "Working the
    news media" isn't all that easy; if the news media could be controlled,
    for instance, Richard Nixon doubtless would have served out two
    full terms.
    
    Advertising just requires a lot of money (you have to buy the "space");
    however, it's the only _sure_ way to get a message across without
    any modification.  The level, type, and placement of ads is a corporate
    decision, and one that's not made lightly.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Steve's excellent comments call to mind an example of what can happen
    to press releases (as opposed to advertising).  The computer news beat
    writer for the Globe is reputedly biased against my former employer
    (not DEC).  He once received a press release from a group holding a
    conference, announcing that the head of our company would be speaking on
    good employee relationships or some such.  This was not a press release
    from our company, mind you; it was from a third party.
    
    The reporter mentioned that our president would be speaking on the
    topic at the conference, then added (I paraphrase from memory), "And he
    should know a thing or two about employee relationships.  Since 1984 he
    has laid off 1,500 employees and frozen the wages of the rest."  Zing!

    Re: .45
    
    Total agreement. The question is, how do other companies manage
    to do both (direct customer communications and media image
    building) well?
    
    Lee

    
    re -.1
    
    Simple. They've made a COMMITMENT to do this, and have backed it
    up with $$$. Some points:
    
    	o As a former customer (MIS manager in a Fortune 10 company), 
    	  I can tell you that it was DIFFICULT internally selling Digital
    	  at times because of the lack of perceived image of "what is
    	  Digital". IBM does NOT spend $100M on TV spots just to see it's
    	  name on the TV. Trust me!
    
    	o The LAST of DEC's problems is if CUSTOMERS suddenly start
    	  CALLING!!!!! Mom & Pop's Food Market will be quickly referred
    	  to one of our CMP/OEM's by 1-800-DIGITAL when they call. 
    	  All major credit cards accepted!
    
    
    DEC's exposure in the press is usually limited to new product
    introductions and Ken's (and I respect him A LOT) bizzare, out of
    context quotations. For example, on the cover of COMMUNICATIONS WEEK
    today:
    
    	"We're so enthusiastic about these products (VAX-6000) that
         we don't care about a recession. Anyway, recessions are a good
         time to get rid of the riff-raff".
    
    Above the quote is a picture of Ken, with a nutty look on his face,
    holding what looks like a board from a VAX-6000 something or other.
    
    I'd MUCH rather see TV commercials than see this! Sorry to say this,
    and I'm a 10-year DEC customer and 3-year employee - and LONG TIME
    KO fan.
    
    /ljj
    

re .42:

>    Some folks from Public Relations gave a talk to our group.  They said
>    that criticizing the competition is a no-no.

This sounds to me like one of those simple generalisations that block thought
and head off initiative. (Maybe that's why some people favour them...)

Let's analyse the implications a bit... The next reply goes some way towards
this:

re .43:

>    _Criticizing_ the competition is a sign of nonprofessionalism. 
>    Pointing out that, say, our product is the best in the field isn't.
>    For a news release, saying something like, "The MicroVAX 2000 system
>    outperformed every comparably priced and configured competitive
>    system," _if true_ and backed by data, isn't criticizing the competition.

From the point of view of how you phrase it and how it's perceived, I guess
this isn't "criticizing the competition". But logically it IS! It seems to me
that to back up the quoted statement, modest as it sounds, you must be
prepared to say specifically:

	1. Just WHAT other systems were compared? (to prove we didn't just
	   pull the statement out of thin air). As soon as we provide a list,
	   the quoted statement implies "The MicroVAX 2000 provides better
	   price-performance than the FOO 123". And there's your comparison!

	2. To say our system is better than another system, is the same as
	   saying that their system is not as good as ours. And there you are,
	   "knocking the opposition"... As I said before, the important thing
	   is probably not the logical content (and implications) of what you
	   say, but HOW you say it.

So I'd sum up by saying that it isn't really possible to praise your own
product without implicitly criticising the competition.
 
>    On the other hand, saying "If you don't by a MicroVAX 3800 dual-host
>    system, but instead by [brand X], you'll be in _deep_ trouble,"
>    that _is_ a no-no, from a standpoint of professionalism.

But this isn't really criticising anyone - it's not even technical or business
advice. It's heavy handed fear tactics, which nobody would advocate. Besides,
since we have decided we are dealing mostly with hard-headed businesses of
substantial size, none of them would even listen to such threats.

The fact is that, whatever PR or Ken or anyone else may lay down, every day
several hundred DEC salesmen and specialists out there are telling customers
what our products do that other people's don't. What's the point in telling
them that CMS and DFS are engineered to provide record-level locking when
accessed over the network by multiple users, if we don't point out that
SCCS and DNS, which Sun offer, doesn't provide that advantage and can thus
lead to corrupted data? Without the comparison to a competitor, it's a boring
technical feature - with it it's a clear differentiating benefit.
 
re .45:

>    Some gurus on the art of winning and keeping customers make the
>    argument that communications to customers, and the customers'
>    perception of the content of those communications, are as equally
>    important as the actual product or service, and advantages and benefits
>    perceived by the customers after using the product or service.

I have heard this argument advanced before, by people who used it to argue that
we don't need to disseminate information about our capabilities widely. "All we
have to do is keep our few big customers carefully briefed on the developments
that are relevant to their businesses..." and because we're the experts in
understanding other people's businesses, we can do this easily! :-)

There are two drawbacks.

(1) We don't begin to understand the businesses of even our biggest corporate
accounts NEARLY as well as they do, and it's incredibly impertinent to suggest
that we do or ever could. It's like saying we can run our business and hack
their's in our spare time.

Furthermore, history shows that the important applications for technology are
hardly ever limited to what the originators had in mind. It's another amazingly
arrogant (and ignorant) assumption to believe that we can take responsibility
for telling all our customers how all our products can help them in every aspect
of their operations. The right thing to do is to tell as many people as possible
about what we can offer, and leave them to create original applications. Then
we sit back and sell the products on which these applications are based.

There may be a couple of kids out there somewhere who could make a fortune
for themselves AND US by figuring out some smart way to get ordinary people
to use VAXnotes (to take one example). But they won't because we prevent them
hearing about the technology.

(2) There's another unjustified assumption: that we understand our own products,
and are able to position them, explain them, and put them together in a
meaningful way. As far as I can see, the number of people in DEC who can make
sense of ALL the architectures, products, services, etc. can be counted on
the fingers of one hand. I have heard a salesman to one of our biggest corporate
accounts tell a meeting how he TWICE refused to bid on an RFP for several
hundred Ada workstations "because he knew Digital didn't have an Ada product".
I happened to know we have what is generally reckoned one of the two best Ada
products in the world (but they got me off him before I killed him). That's
just a single example from my personal experience.

And it's getting WORSE rapidly. We have more and more architectures, more and
more hardware families, software environments, markets...

One possible reason for our failure to get out there and explain what we're
doing in simple, understandable terms is that we CAN'T.

--Tom

    Re: .49   Too True!!
    
    Also a long-time customer, I came over 'cause it's easier to sell
    DEC from here than as the IS Director.  Maybe it's just a rest.
    
    Perception is everything - yet we choose to be percieved as ????
    rather than what we are.
    
    I was an IBMer when they refused to advertise, but that was when
    all computers were IBM-machines using IBM cards and IBM-tapes. 
    Once that perception changed, advertising was implemented to maintain
    awareness.
    
    I really don't like the way we're put on the defensive by the world's
    lack of perception about us...  people send me things addressed
    to Digi------; people in our business (i.e. MIS types) ask what
    we do and some even ask why I left computing!!
    
    The ads we needs are NOT cutesy, award-winning or not, nor are
    they the vague 'good corporate citizen' kind of thing.  We need
    people in general to know we are a computer company, we are the
    network company, we are the future.
    
    An ad I'll always remember, which I think was very effective because
    it was for a company I was NOT a customer of, was a series.  At
    the end of each ad, a graphic which, I guess, represented weaving
    built up on the screen with the company's logo under it and voice-over
    said: "If it's anything to do with fabric, we do it at Burlington.
     And we do more of it than anyone else in the world!"
           
    We need to develop that kind of perception.  (Or have 25-page business
    cards)
    
    Don

Further to .50, here is an account of one of the handful of people who
really can give the big picture (copied without permission). We could use
LOTS more of this sort of thing (especially in Europe, for a change):


             <<< NODEMO::$1$DJA2:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MARKETING.NOTE;1 >>>
                   -< Marketing - Digital Internal Use Only >-
================================================================================
Note 847.2                       PR Issues Again                          2 of 2
DCC::HAGARTY "Essen, Trinken und Shaggen..."         35 lines  31-MAY-1989 12:17
                     -< William Demmer interview in D.R. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahhh Gi'day...�

			    BOUQUETS for once!!!

    I just  read  the  latest  Digital  Review, and I must say I was *VERY*
    impressed  with an interview with William Demmer (Mid Range systems) in
    there...

    What it had:

	.  Plenty  of  talk about product directions for Digital! Customers
	need and want this information!

	. Direct answers to questions, no "I cannot comment's"

	.  Customer  friendly  manner!  Didn't  talk  about making piles of
	money,  but  more  what  we  could  do  for the customers computing
	requirements!

	.  Talked at a customer's level - about running applications etc

	.  Plain, down to earth comments expressed in a positive, confident
	manner.

    What it *DIDN'T* have (these are +ve points too):

	. The most overrated and misused term in computing - "SOLUTIONS!"

	.  Marketing-speak! The only people who should be interested in our
	marketing strategies etc should be US!

	. Guarded comments!

    Congratulations to  all who involved themselves in organizing this, and
    to William Demmer himself! This should be used as a model for others.

>>    Some folks from Public Relations gave a talk to our group.  They said
>>    that criticizing the competition is a no-no.
>
>This sounds to me like one of those simple generalisations that block thought
>and head off initiative. (Maybe that's why some people favour them...)

	  That's giving the concept very short shrift.

	  Haven't you ever noticed how easy it is to tell who is the
	industry leader by their commercials?:

	  Who mentions the competition in their ads - McDonalds or
	Burger King?

	  Who compares themselves directly to another company - MCI
	or AT&T?

	  Who resorts to silly (at best) contests to prove who's
	better - Chevy trucks or Ford trucks?

	  Why do other Japanese auto makes compare themselves to
	Honda and Toyota, and not vice-versa?

	Who instituted the "challenge" - Coke or Pepsi?

	etc....

	  When you're #1, you don't bother with the guys behind you,
	for a number of reasons - you point out your strengths and
	keep plugging the "we're #1" message. When you're #2 you
	don't mention whomever is #3, etc - it starts putting you
	on their level in the eyes of the customer. They'll read
	your ads and think, "why does he compare himself to *that*
	company? Maybe I"ll look into it." 

	  And of course, if comparisons turn into criticism, it
	looks more like sniping and sour grapes.

	Those are just my opinions, but I believe them valid. 

	Roy

Re .50:

>>    Some folks from Public Relations gave a talk to our group.  They said
>>    that criticizing the competition is a no-no.
>
>This sounds to me like one of those simple generalisations that block thought
>and head off initiative. (Maybe that's why some people favour them...)

I can't tell you whether to regard "Don't criticise the competition" as an
inspired proverb or an invalid generalization, and I can't tell you how to apply
it in the field.  However, I first read the rule a long time ago in an
enumeration of points of "Digital Philosophy" printed in the Engineering Guide.
From "1988-1989 Internal Guide to Digital Organzations" (A-MN-ELENGRS-OM-0
Rev H, 30-Jun-1988):

"
1.3 DIGITAL PHILOSOPHY

The Strategy Committee feels that the following stastement of PHILOSOPHY may be
helpful for guidance in communicating the kind of company we would like to be to
employees and people outside of Digital.

...

Competitors

We never criticize the competition publicly.  We sell by presenting the positive
features of our own products.  We want to be respectful of all competition, and
collect and analyze all public information about competition.  When we hire
people from competitors, we should neither ask them for confidential, competitive
information, nor should we use confidential literature they may have taken
with them.
"

You'll have to decide for yourself how important this philosophy is.  Note
however, that the same list ends with the following entry.  Perhaps it is
more familiar to members of this conference:

"
First Rule

When dealing with a customer, a supplier, or an employee, do what is right
in each situation.
"
				/AHM

    Re .42:
    
    Digital policy discourages "competition bashing." We are free to
    compare and contrast our products with the competition, but we are not
    supposed to bash. A good example is how we promoted the DECstation
    3100. Instead of calling Sun's products bad and awful, we simply stated
    a price/performance comparison, while highlighting other Digital
    advantages.
    
    Bashing just leaves a bad taste in people's mouths. And there are some
    things that our competitiors do better than Digital.
    
    -- Peter Kobs
    ULTRIX Public Relations

    re .54
    
    Of course, that must be why I never see any memos/notes about "we just
    hired this person from XXX and XXX is doing this and that and has these
    problems."  And, I never ever see any memos/notes about how XXX has
    delivery problems or bugs or delivery failures.  And, of course, if I
    should happen to stumble on such information, I'd never tell any of my
    customers about it -- nor would anyone else I know at DEC do it in a 
    competitive customer situation.  And, of course, I always do what's
    RIGHT.  Now, you must realize, I'm never confused about intent and
    what's written nor why it's written, nor about who's defintion of RIGHT 
    we might be referring to.  (I must tell you though that I've been
    looked in a closet for years and get all my information through this
    hole in the door.)

    Re: .56
    
    When we hire a person from a competitor, that person probably comes
    with information regarded as trade secrets by the competitor. The kinds
    of information cited in .56 are frequently regarded as trade secrets. 
    Asking the new employee for those secrets, or the employee giving them
    out, can cause all sorts of horrible legal problems for the employee
    and for Digital.  And if, by accident, you should discover some of
    them, be careful to keep them secret yourself and not use the
    information.

    >  <<< Note 847.53 by CHIRPA::SWONGER "What more could you ask for?" >>>
    >                 -< Don't put us down on their level >-
    >  <<< Note 847.53 by CHIRPA::SWONGER "What more could you ask for?" >>>
    >                 -< Don't put us down on their level >-
    I'm sure the folks in marketing will agree with .53, it brings back
    memories from advertising courses in college (let's not discuss how long
    ago...).
    
    >...on their level in the eyes of the customer. They'll read
    >your ads and think, "why does he compare himself to *that*
    >company? Maybe I"ll look into it." 
    
    Any mention of the "other guy" in an advertisment is an automatic plug
    for your competition, and should be avoided at all costs. Ever wonder
    why the courts aren't flooded with law suits from the "other guy" in
    comparison ads?
    
    Becuase the competetion loves it!
    
    If Digital did advertise, the best approach would be the "Burlington"
    type commercial mentioned earlier.  How many of you have watched
    "Infinite Voyage" on PBS? At the beginning and end there is a short
    promo with graphics of an animated Digital logo:
    
    "Because there is always knowlege to be gained, new paths to explore,
    and mysteries to unlock, the Infinite Voyage is made possible by a
    grant from Digital Equipment Corporation."
    
    Longest DEC ad I've seen yet.

    The reason Digital's advertising sucks is because we have some of
    executives making decisions about advertising. And of course they don't
    understand anything about advertising...
    
    Some people in ESG won awards from magazines as having the best ads.
    But last person to win such an award got jumped on by corporate for not
    following corporate guidelines of the official ad format. He got around
    it by co-funding the ad with Tektronix (letting Tektronix do the
    production). Not appreciating unconventional contributors, upper
    management eventually pushed him out of ESG in a recent reorg. The
    award plaque with a picture of the ad now sits on the manager's wall...
    
    -George

    Advertising a company is an emotional issue.  You want to make the
    customer *feel good* about making a decision to buy your product.
    Or, you want them to *feel good* about your company so that they
    will think they are making a *good* decision to look at/buy your
    product in the future.  
    
    If you just convinced a middle manager to recommend Digital to their
    executive committee (or whoever the decision maker is), wouldn't
    it be nice for those people to *feel good* about the recommendation
    because they *felt comfortable* with Digital?
    
    If the decision makers are constantly bombarded with advertising
    from everyone *but* Digital, how do you think they *feel*?  Maybe
    a few twinges of doubt???        
    
    We are a great engineering company, we make the *best* products,
    but we have the *worst* marketing.  IBM makes **** products (rathole)
    but has *great* marketing.  How is Digital ever going to be as
    big as IBM if we can't be marketing oriented???
    
    Question: when will we (Digital employees) stop this self flagellation
    about advertising and get someone to *listen* to common sense: 1)
    advertising helps us sell products, 2) we need to create "name
    recognition" not by number of products sold, but by number of people
    reached with "the message", 3) why do all other major and a lot
    of minor (computer) companies advertise on TV *if it doesn't work*?
    or do we have some magic corner on advertising effectivity???
    
    Who needs to read this note topic??? Will someone forward it to
    corporate PR? Or whoever is responsible for marketing philosophy
    in this corporation?  There are some great ideas in this topic,
    and I'll bet that given free reign, we could come up with some killer
    ideas!!!  
    
    So, will things *ever* change? If not, why not?  Can
    anyone answer this?  There are a lot of people working for this
    company who would like to know...

    re .60:
        
    >Advertising a company is an emotional issue.  You want to make the
    >customer *feel good* about making a decision to buy your product.
    >Or, you want them to *feel good* about your company so that they
    >will think they are making a *good* decision to look at/buy your
    >product in the future.  
     
    These are the two levels of advertising.  The first is "consumer-level"
    advertising.  It's what's used to sell detergent, oleomargarine,
    cereal, and the like.  The second is "corporate recognition"
    advertising: the percentage of people who'd rush out to buy a new
    car on the basis of an advertisement is very tiny; it's to get the
    audience to look with favor at the product.
    
    >If you just convinced a middle manager to recommend Digital to their
    >executive committee (or whoever the decision maker is), wouldn't
    >it be nice for those people to *feel good* about the recommendation
    >because they *felt comfortable* with Digital?
     
    No argument.  But where would one advertise to reach the executive
    committee cost-effectively?  This will be discussed shortly.
    
    >We are a great engineering company, we make the *best* products,
    >but we have the *worst* marketing.  IBM makes **** products (rathole)
    >but has *great* marketing.  How is Digital ever going to be as
    >big as IBM if we can't be marketing oriented???
     
    Marketing encompasses advertising as an activity, but goes far beyond
    that.
    
    >Question: when will we (Digital employees) stop this self flagellation
    >about advertising and get someone to *listen* to common sense: 1)
    >advertising helps us sell products, 2) we need to create "name
    >recognition" not by number of products sold, but by number of people
    >reached with "the message", 3) why do all other major and a lot
    >of minor (computer) companies advertise on TV *if it doesn't work*?
    >or do we have some magic corner on advertising effectivity???
     
    Advertising does indeed help sell products.  However, given our
    current pushes into our markets, does _television_ advertising
    reach the appropriate target audiences effectively?  IBM advertised
    the whey out of its PC; however, its PC was effectively a consumer
    product.  Wang had some _spectacular_ computer/network television
    ads, and they're hardly in great shape.  Television ads are aimed
    at a very broad base of viewers, and most of them are currently
    not interested in Digital's products, because they don't affect
    them directly.  (E.g., a MicroVAX 3100 is a marvelous platform for
    a travel reservation system, and we're actively going after that
    market with that product.  But a TV ad to that effect would do little
    good: the majority of the people who would see it wouldn't care
    what system got them their airline tickets, just as long as those
    tickets were delivered.  A more effective way to reach the proper
    people would be to advertise in _Airfare Interline Magazine_ (circ.
    40,000), _Tour and Travel News_ (circ. 48,000) or _Travel Agent
    Magazine_ (circ. 57,000), for instance.  Here, a far higher percentage
    of the audience is a potential target for sales -- in short, making
    the advertising cost-effective).  The basic thing Digital _did_
    advertise on TV was our series of "personal computers" (primarily
    the Professional 300 series); and we all know how effective _that_
    was. :-)
    
    >Who needs to read this note topic??? Will someone forward it to
    >corporate PR? Or whoever is responsible for marketing philosophy
    >in this corporation?
     
    Cautionary: PR isn't advertising.  Digital has a Corporate Advertising
    department as well as a Corporate PR department; however, Corporate
    Advertising does not set marketing policy or decisions; the department
    executes advertisements derived as part of marketing decisions.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

     I don't think running TV ads to sell VAXes directly to viewers would
     be cost effective. What I would like to see is some type of ad which
     depicts DEC as a good community citizen. 

     An example of this is the DuPont ads featuring the guy who lost the
     use of his legs in Vietnam. The gist of it is with DuPont developed
     prosthesis, he can now play basketball again. The intent is not to
     sell a product, but to leave the viewer with a powerful feeling of
     gratitude that DuPont is helping people live better lives.
     I don't think many people can watch that commercial without getting a
     lump in their throat.  Whenever I see it, I cant help but wish I could
     have worked at DuPont, and helped make that possible.

     What could DEC do along those lines? How about promoting the charities
     the company sponsors. The benefits of corporate contributions. Some of
     the ways our products are used to help people live better. Plant the seed
     in people's mind that DEC is in business for more then just making money.

     Marc V.
    

  > I don't think many people can watch that commercial without getting a
  > lump in their throat. 

	I can, and I don't think it's because I'm particularly 
	insensitive to the sufferings of others.   I just don't
	wish to hear "aren't we a fine public-spirited company"
	hypocrisy, thank you very much.


  > Whenever I see it, I cant help but wish I could
  > have worked at DuPont, and helped make that possible.

	You serious?  This seems to demonstrate extreme susceptibility
	to advertising bullshit... the fact is that DuPont exists
	to make a profit, not to do good deeds.  OK, so maybe once in
	a while they get to do good deeds and make a profit at the
	same time, but let's keep things in perspective.

------

    Re .62 (Marc):
    
    >What could DEC do along those lines? How about promoting the charities
    >the company sponsors. The benefits of corporate contributions.
     
    That's kinda contrary to the idea of doing the right thing and not
    masking much of a fuss over it.
    
    _If_ Digital were to do a national ad campaign, I'd suspect it'd
    concentrate on the impact of computers on society (without specifying
    that all shown are ours).   
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    One reason DuPont spends a lot of money on feel-good advertising is
    that they're battling a negative public image.  Do you remember their
    old slogan?  "Better living through chemicals."  Today the word
    "chemicals" is associated with "artificial," "dangerous," "Bhopal," and
    the like in the public's eye.  That's only my opinion, of course, but
    DuPont DOES spend a lot of money trying to make us feel good about
    them.
    
    I don't think Digital has to battle a negative perception.
    
    (Perhaps someone will explain the point of the Wang commericals in
    which hyperkinetic sales reps trade war stories.  I could follow the
    dialog, but my wife, who's in a different technical area, once
    commented that they were total gibberish to her.  Is a commercial few
    can understand effective?)

    Re: .65
    
    You're thinking of Monsanto, not DuPont.  DuPont doesn't really need
    a big boost of their image, since their name is synonymous with Teflon.
    And I'm not aware of their being targetted as producers of offensive
    chemicals, such as Dow was with Napalm (said business having since
    been sold to American Cyanamid.)
    
    Image campaigns like DuPont's are often more aimed at potential
    investors than anything else.
    
    				Steve

    Re: Steve Jong
    
    DuPont has a negative image?  Of all the major chemical companies, DuPont's
    reputation is without question either the best or in the top two.
    
    DuPont's corporate slogan has *never* been "better living through
    chemicals."  It was something like "better living through chemistry";
    there is a very important distinction and, at any rate, this hasn't
    been used for a long time.  DuPont has been diversifying away from
    commodity chemicals for years now, and their advertising reflects this
    fact.  Making people feel "good" about the company is a very effective
    advertising technique if done correctly.  Digital has employed this
    quite often in our "Digital has it now" ads.
    
    If you're going to use specific company's names, you should really get
    your facts straight.  Especially if they are major Digital customers.

    Don't DuPont make a lot of CFCs and CFC-derived products?

    Boy, do I ever get grumpy at night.  Sorry for the strident tone.
    
    They are probably one of the largest producers of CFCs in the U.S., and
    maybe the world.  They're also working on the alternatives to the
    currently most popular, and environmentally damaging, CFCs.
    
    Interestingly enough, with the exception of the senate hearings last
    year, DuPont hasn't been tightly linked in the media as being at fault
    for the ozone crisis.  The blame has in large part been put on
    consumers, instead.  Almost like a Teflon (TM) company ;^).

    Re .61
    
    Thanks for your insights.  I guess my main frustrations about Digital's
    lack of advertising/marketing in the "feel good" arena arise from
    a lack of ideas about how to do it.  I just would like to have Digital
    have a better, or wider, name recognition.  It seems to me that
    it would be like getting interest on your money - deposit now, and
    collect interest later.  Advertise the company (again, how, I'm
    not sure...) and in the future people who are in the market for
    our products would look to us.  Remember we sell other things besides
    VAXes (er VAX computer systems).  IBM didn't get its "mystique"
    over-night, it took a long concerted effort.  I don't see us making
    the effort, other than token ads here and there.  
    
    Larry

    Re .61  PC Stategy.

-=P/OS - It's the only true Multi-tasking OS! all others are just copies!=-

    Advertising the PROFESSIONAL Series was probably a great idea,
    however, I never saw one!  When it first came out I probably would
    have been the first to purchased one.  But the Price $$$$$ Unrealistic!
    It had the chance to be where the PC Market is today! (Big $)

    Advertising is a way to get the message out to customers about our
    products, but they need to be directed to the proper market, and
    not just the masses.  But just getting the DIGITAL name on TV will
    not bring in a revenue.   We need to emphasize that we have the
    reasonably priced, superior products that the customer wants NOW!

    - Mike

    My belief is that DIGITAL should continue to seek name recognition
    via underwriting shows like NBR, and The DIGITAL Discovery Series.
    
    Additionally, we should seek to do the same with NOVA, and the MacNeil
    Lerher Report (sp?).  IMHO, PBS is where DEC should be spending those
    television dollars.  How many of you remember who sponsors the Roseann
    Barr (sp?) Show vs. NOVA, NBR, MLR??  
    
    One thing that concerns me is that on NBR, we keep changing our
    slogan - it seems to be diffenrent every time I hear it...
    
    Oh well.
    
    -Jp

    Digital's ads are so low key that when they're done you remember it
    was computer or networking ad, but can't quite remember which company
    it was they talking about.
    
    A recent turn around of events is that the hardware PBUs will now be
    allowed to do product advertisements. But even though over 90% of all
    PCs are sold to businesses, it's unlikely we'd see Digital advertise PCs
    like IBM does: 1) We don't sell to small businesses that have decision
    makers that watch TV. 2) We don't sell to end-user users -- only
    coporate executives that don't watch TVs. 3) Corporate MARCOM groups
    impose too much bureaucratic control to ever have a creative ad. 4)
    It's not in their budget to pay for that kind of advertising.
    
    Advertising VAX 6000s on TV? Ah, come on. What a bore. What? How about
    a slick enterprise-wide integration ad showing a range of products?
    That would have to come from the same group that does the current ads.
    Can you really invision them being creative?
    
    -George

 <re: .73>

I used to work in the San Francisco (financial district) Digital Business Center.
We got a lot of our business from walk-in traffic.  An IBM retail store was one
block away.  I found that consumers misperceptions could work FOR me, as well 
as against me. 

When I was assigned "floor duty" I had to greet everyone that walked into the
store.  Frequently, I found myself convincing people that I could NOT change 
the battery in their digital watch,  For these folks, I directed them to a
variety store down the street.

However, whenever IBM implemented a television advertising campaign, I could
count on OUR walk-in traffic increasing!  Whether the Charlie Chaplin was
pushing personal computers during the Super Bowl; or the 9370 was being touted
as my mid-range solution; or IBM was conducting an institutional ad that 
us that they were saving mankind; the affect was consistant -- increased traffic
(ie sales prospects in our store)!

Many times, I would hear comments from these prospects such as "I really like
your Charlie Chaplin ads", or "I didn't realize that Digital is helping to save
the environment."

In fact, I sold a computer to a person who came to our store after seeing 
an IBM Super Bowl commercial.  While I was writing up the sale, he complemented
me on "our" entertaining ad. I smiled and thanked him.

--Bruce

 

    Here is what I want to see in 30 secs:
    
    Swell of music (something pastorial...)
    
    Fade in on a vast field of golden wheat
    
    Cut to the someplace in Washington (Capital bldg)..
    
    Cut to New York Financial district (Frantic trading in the PIT)...
    
    Cut to Oil platform in the ocean (helcopter landing...)....
    
    Cut to interior office computing shot with workstations....
    
    Cut to manufacturing weld line (lots of sparks...)....
    
    Cut to delivery room full of new borns, nurse checking a terminal.....
    
    Cut to late nite (at home) successful/finacial VAXstation user (male),
    comtemplating is screen (with graphics and numbers) in a quiet moment..  
    
    Fade into Digital logo /
    
    Voice over -- 
    
    Digital Equipment, solving tommorow's information needs, today.
    
    Queue station identification
    
    ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    
    
    Is this so much to ask?  If IBM can show school kids with
    superconductors, why can't we have motherhood, apple pie, God and
    country associated with our name?
    
    And I'd show it and a whole series like it during 60 Minutes, 48 hours,
    news and talk shows, anyplace that presented a serious forum.
    
    Everyone remembers the Wang/helcopter commercial (We're gunning for you 
    IBM...).  I've been in the DEC world for the last 8 years, still
    my mother-in-law is still waiting for me to join a "REAL" company!
    
    Who you gonna call?  You start with the people who's name you know...
                                                              

    re -.1
    
    Your commercial is GREAT!  But it will never see the light of
    day because it can't be quantified - it won't sell *products*, isn't
    aimed at any target, and can't, won't, shouldn't etc etc etc
    
    This is probably how "we" make the decision to advertise Digital.
    
    Us weenies could probably come up with 1000 reasons why we *should*
    do commercials like this, but *we* don't have marketing degrees
    do we???
    
    Larry - with a degree in common sense 101
    

    Yes, it would be nice to see flashy, catchy ads which publicize
    Digital and/or our products.  Yes, it would be nice to increase
    our name recognition beyond Middlesex County, MA and Hillsborough
    County, NH.  However, "We" (the general public) don't influence
    the purchase of large amounts of computer equipment.  The I*M ad
    campaign using the former MASH cast may have been cute, but was
    it particularly effective at reaching the proper audience?  I doubt
    it.  Similarly, the Wang ads, and now the Bull ads.
    
    We are facing a time of making smart investments; I for one would
    rather see the company expending its energy creating dull, strictly
    targeted ads which appeal to the 100,000 managers who have purchasing
    authority rather than brilliantly creative ads which reach 100,000,000
    people watching "Roseanne" who will never be in a position to buy any
    equipment from us in their life. 
    
    Bruce
    
    P.S. I am a cost center manager; I like the Digital ads in Infinite
    Voyage; I dislike almost all mass-market TV advertisements, especially
    for commodity-type products (cars, cereal, personal hygiene, etc.); I
    have to believe that my counterparts at our current and potential
    customers are something like me. 

re: 77
    
>    P.S. I am a cost center manager; I like the Digital ads in Infinite
>    Voyage; I dislike almost all mass-market TV advertisements, especially
>    for commodity-type products (cars, cereal, personal hygiene, etc.); I
>    have to believe that my counterparts at our current and potential
>    customers are something like me. 
    
    Right. And what do most cost center manager know about advertising? Most
    know very little, but are willing to make decisions based on their own
    feelings rather than letting marketeers do their jobs.
    
    How many cost center managers know who the real decision maker is in a
    target market? Very few in the scientific/engineering market, I can
    tell you. For example, in the engineering market for electronics CAD,
    an engineer makes the decision. The manager just signs the PO. We've
    lost a lot of sales where we sold the manager on Digital, and the
    manager signed the PO for Apollo WSs because the engineers wanted
    Mentor Graphics software and the better performance.
    
    How many cost center managers look at issues like average age of that
    decision maker in a particular market? Maybe you can't relate to an
    ad that another age group might?
    
    The fact that you find the IBM ads cute but not appealing to "decision
    makers" shows some advertising ignorance. IBM's TV ads target the small
    to mid size business. They create an association of their name to a
    very cute ad. That visual and emotional association makes the name easy
    to remember and gives a warm feeling that the company understands their
    fears and needs. They picked pleasant associations with the age group
    that was targeted, e.g., Mash characters. The Charley Chaplin ads from
    IBM were picked because end users could identify with a clutz that
    intimidated by something complex. IBM picked their markets, picked
    the target audience in that market, understood the demographics,
    ages, likes, fears. The IBM ads were very well done.
    
    Digital doesn't target the small and mid-size business except through
    VARs which don't have the resources to do high quality ads on national
    TV.
    
    You're a manager in a computer company. What makes you think you
    understand how a construction company manager thinks? Do you think that
    manager feels more comfortable purchasing from a company he never heard
    of until the Digital sales rep knocked on the door? Does that customer
    feel more comfortable buying from a company that sells computers,
    networking, and operating systems but can't provide "cute" images that
    give an inkling of how they might be useful to that manager?
    
    When managers butt out of advertising, and let marketeers do their
    jobs, we'd see a lot more market pull for our products.
    
    -George