![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Not wishing to make KFC the sole butt of my annoyance at modern advertising, I thought I would mention a couple of other marketing campaigns that indicate product designers in severe need of a happy slap.
I mean, is it any wonder that we become cynical when large companies twist the truth so shamelessly? I can only hope that the board of Halifax and Centrica have low-paid researchers trawling Google Alerts for any mentions of their companies, just so they can see what shits I think they are.
The Halifax advert (for which, also, shoot the managers of the campaign; I do not want to buy financial products from people who look like they frequent nightclubs in Essex) appears to offer 6.17% on an account. But, look closely at the small print. You have to pay in at least £1,000 a month, and this rate of interest is only paid on the first £2,500 in the account. The interest rate on money above this level is at the next tier down.
And what rate, you might ask, is the next tier down?
0.1%, that's what.
So, look at it from Halifax marketing point of view. If you think of a customer who pays in a grand a month as an "acquisition", and you reckon that this interest rate is about two points higher than they would be able to pay (and still make a profit), then the maximum cost to Halifax is 2% of £2,500, or the grand sum of £50. Not bad as an acquisition cost.
But, of course, that doesn't allow for the amount over £2,500 that people leave in the account. Indeed, an average of £3,750 would make the acquisition cost effectively zero. Meanwhile, for those who leave less than £2,500 in the account, the cost of acqusition once again falls away.
Let's suppose, though, that everyone shrewdly used the Halifax scheme to maximum benefit. What do you think would happen? Well, I'll tell you my predictions.
1) The Halifax would issue a press release calling such customers "rate tarts" or some such similar pejorative term.
2) It would change the rules of the account.
As a peak-time headline rate advertisement, it's all perfectly legal (of course). That GOMs like me consider it exploitation of loophole after loophole in the advertising rules is, well, neither here nor there.
I was reminded of the most chutzpah-ish piece of salesmanship the other day, when a letter from British Gas notified me that their prices were coming down. Well, I thought to myself, about time, what with wholesale gas prices coming way off their highs of 18 months ago.
But it was about 18 months ago that British Gas sent me a letter that had me laughing in disbelief. Right after hiking their prices astronomically (because wholesale prices had doubled), the company offered me the chance to lock in at the current rates. That, in itself, was a piece of brass nerve, since it locked me into British Gas. But, on top of that, they wanted to charge me for the privilege.
I wonder hwo many people paid that 3.5% (or whatever it was) for the privilege of locking in at rates some 10% or so higher than I am now paying. I bet they are happy BG customers. About as happy as any of the people who seem to queue up to complain about the so-called "service agreement" you can take out with BG. Under this agreement, you pay BG lots of money every month, and they then have no incentive to send someone round when your boiler breaks down, because BG already has your money.
++++++++
I see that Captain America has taken it in the neck after 60 or so years as a comic book superhero. It got me thinking. Would anyone even imagine a comic book "Captain UK" (apart from Rory Bremner in satirical mode)? I doubt it. I mean, we wouldn't be able to take it seriously, would we? And yet, here we have Captain America.
The more I thought about this, the more I realized how similar America today is with Britain in the late 19th century. Here we have countries that really do believe that they are doing good, and have the money that they have spent to prove it, and yet they remain utterly bemused when many other countries do not repay this philanthropism with undying gratitude. The UK then and Britain now had the world's dominant reserve currency, which enabled Britain in the 19th century and the USA today to function with an ever-burgeoning foreign account deficit. And Britain in the 19th century had its John Bull, a character created without ironic intent and not laughed at in any way shape or form.
John Bull kind of died out with the loss of Empire from 1947 on. Captain America died today. Interesting times.
+++++++
I heard a fascinating statistic on Radio Five last night (although I haven't checked for its veracity). This was that the average age of the football premiership attender this year is 43. I've long been a fan of the "organic" nature of products - be they newspapers, or companies. Young people's newspapers become old people's newspapers, and young companies become old companies, in the sense that older people are working for them. It's a kind of "fiscal drag" in terms of age.
Now it looks as if football is going the same way. Prices have been hiked so dramatically since I was a kid that it is no longer a Saturday or Sunday's entertainment for young people. It's live entertainment for people like me, who used to go when they were young, for the grand price of 2/- or thereabouts, but who can now pay whatever it is that Chelsea charge. Not that I do go (I haven't been to a game since 1972), but I could.
But what of the future? It seems to me that if the habit of going to live games is not inculcated in the young, then, eventually, you are going to get attendances falling off for the simple reason that attenders last year are dead this year.
+++++++++
A lovely walk back through Hyde Park from the Vietnamese Embassy to the office. I actually saw the Diana Memorial Fountain for the first time. The Lido restaurant looks a lovely place to relax over a cup of coffee. The Rio was on; the world was free of bicycles, cars, horses, roller-skaters, schoolkids, shoppers, policemen, traffic wardens, security announcements and McDonald's. Just the Serpentine, some swans and ducks, some boats, and quiet people having a nice quiet time. Rock on les vieux.
I mean, is it any wonder that we become cynical when large companies twist the truth so shamelessly? I can only hope that the board of Halifax and Centrica have low-paid researchers trawling Google Alerts for any mentions of their companies, just so they can see what shits I think they are.
The Halifax advert (for which, also, shoot the managers of the campaign; I do not want to buy financial products from people who look like they frequent nightclubs in Essex) appears to offer 6.17% on an account. But, look closely at the small print. You have to pay in at least £1,000 a month, and this rate of interest is only paid on the first £2,500 in the account. The interest rate on money above this level is at the next tier down.
And what rate, you might ask, is the next tier down?
0.1%, that's what.
So, look at it from Halifax marketing point of view. If you think of a customer who pays in a grand a month as an "acquisition", and you reckon that this interest rate is about two points higher than they would be able to pay (and still make a profit), then the maximum cost to Halifax is 2% of £2,500, or the grand sum of £50. Not bad as an acquisition cost.
But, of course, that doesn't allow for the amount over £2,500 that people leave in the account. Indeed, an average of £3,750 would make the acquisition cost effectively zero. Meanwhile, for those who leave less than £2,500 in the account, the cost of acqusition once again falls away.
Let's suppose, though, that everyone shrewdly used the Halifax scheme to maximum benefit. What do you think would happen? Well, I'll tell you my predictions.
1) The Halifax would issue a press release calling such customers "rate tarts" or some such similar pejorative term.
2) It would change the rules of the account.
As a peak-time headline rate advertisement, it's all perfectly legal (of course). That GOMs like me consider it exploitation of loophole after loophole in the advertising rules is, well, neither here nor there.
I was reminded of the most chutzpah-ish piece of salesmanship the other day, when a letter from British Gas notified me that their prices were coming down. Well, I thought to myself, about time, what with wholesale gas prices coming way off their highs of 18 months ago.
But it was about 18 months ago that British Gas sent me a letter that had me laughing in disbelief. Right after hiking their prices astronomically (because wholesale prices had doubled), the company offered me the chance to lock in at the current rates. That, in itself, was a piece of brass nerve, since it locked me into British Gas. But, on top of that, they wanted to charge me for the privilege.
I wonder hwo many people paid that 3.5% (or whatever it was) for the privilege of locking in at rates some 10% or so higher than I am now paying. I bet they are happy BG customers. About as happy as any of the people who seem to queue up to complain about the so-called "service agreement" you can take out with BG. Under this agreement, you pay BG lots of money every month, and they then have no incentive to send someone round when your boiler breaks down, because BG already has your money.
++++++++
I see that Captain America has taken it in the neck after 60 or so years as a comic book superhero. It got me thinking. Would anyone even imagine a comic book "Captain UK" (apart from Rory Bremner in satirical mode)? I doubt it. I mean, we wouldn't be able to take it seriously, would we? And yet, here we have Captain America.
The more I thought about this, the more I realized how similar America today is with Britain in the late 19th century. Here we have countries that really do believe that they are doing good, and have the money that they have spent to prove it, and yet they remain utterly bemused when many other countries do not repay this philanthropism with undying gratitude. The UK then and Britain now had the world's dominant reserve currency, which enabled Britain in the 19th century and the USA today to function with an ever-burgeoning foreign account deficit. And Britain in the 19th century had its John Bull, a character created without ironic intent and not laughed at in any way shape or form.
John Bull kind of died out with the loss of Empire from 1947 on. Captain America died today. Interesting times.
+++++++
I heard a fascinating statistic on Radio Five last night (although I haven't checked for its veracity). This was that the average age of the football premiership attender this year is 43. I've long been a fan of the "organic" nature of products - be they newspapers, or companies. Young people's newspapers become old people's newspapers, and young companies become old companies, in the sense that older people are working for them. It's a kind of "fiscal drag" in terms of age.
Now it looks as if football is going the same way. Prices have been hiked so dramatically since I was a kid that it is no longer a Saturday or Sunday's entertainment for young people. It's live entertainment for people like me, who used to go when they were young, for the grand price of 2/- or thereabouts, but who can now pay whatever it is that Chelsea charge. Not that I do go (I haven't been to a game since 1972), but I could.
But what of the future? It seems to me that if the habit of going to live games is not inculcated in the young, then, eventually, you are going to get attendances falling off for the simple reason that attenders last year are dead this year.
+++++++++
A lovely walk back through Hyde Park from the Vietnamese Embassy to the office. I actually saw the Diana Memorial Fountain for the first time. The Lido restaurant looks a lovely place to relax over a cup of coffee. The Rio was on; the world was free of bicycles, cars, horses, roller-skaters, schoolkids, shoppers, policemen, traffic wardens, security announcements and McDonald's. Just the Serpentine, some swans and ducks, some boats, and quiet people having a nice quiet time. Rock on les vieux.
