November 21, 2009
Login | Register Now

Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News


More from Ad Age:
Creativity
Ad Age China
Bookstore
Jobs
Ad Age On Campus
Sign up for E-mail Newsletters

Stay on top of the news, sign up for our free newsletters


The Last Campaign: How Experiences Are Becoming the New Advertising

Red Bull, Virgin America, Uniqlo and Guinness Lead the Way

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Submit to Digg Add to Google Share on StumbleUpon Submit to LinkedIn Add to Newsvine Bookmark on Del.icio.us Submit to Reddit

Garrick Schmitt
Garrick Schmitt
Is advertising dying? It's certainly fashionable to say so. Conventional wisdom holds that traditional media's grip on consumers continues to slip as they increasingly turn to the internet and their peers for entertainment and purchasing recommendations.

In fact, any planner worth his or her salt can reel off a stream of statistics pointing to advertising's demise -- or lack of effectiveness, at least: Prime-time continues to erode as all the major networks saw significant declines for last year's season; 77% of U.S. consumers trust businesses less than they did a year ago; consumers trust their peers' opinions online more than any other source and a whopping 83% of Mad Men's supposedly ad-friendly time-shifted audience fast forwards through commercials according to Tivo. The list goes on and on.

But perhaps it's not that advertising is failing but that brand experiences (both on and offline) are really what are capturing the imagination of today's consumer. In FEED, a new report that I authored with my colleagues at Razorfish, we found that digital brand experiences are having an inordinate sway on consumer purchasing habits and brand affinity.

For example, 65% of U.S. consumers report a digital experience changing their perception about a brand (either positively or negatively) and 97% of that group report that the same experience ultimately influenced whether or not they went on to purchase a product from that brand. In a nutshell, experience matters. A lot.

Of course, brands that were "born digital" intuitively know this. Google and Amazon are pioneering experiential brands. That's why Amazon continues to pour money into improving its customer service rather than run traditional advertising or marketing campaigns. As Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has said, "We are not great advertisers. So we start with customers, figure out what they want, and figure out how to get it to them." Zappos (which recently hired Mullen) built its brand the same way, as has Facebook.

But what about more traditionally-minded marketers who weren't born digital? Can they succeed in an experience-driven world? The answer is "yes" and here are some of the best:

Red Bull: Red Bull basically pioneered the experiential category. Not only did the brand rise to prominence by sponsoring alternative athletes and lifestyles, it went further by creating its own events, like Red Bull's Flugtag and even its own sports like Red Bull's Crashed Ice, which takes over old Quebec with a mix of hockey and motorcross. Even the brand's website has morphed into a blog, much like today's most popular publishers.


Camper: Most of us in the U.S. think of Camper as purely a comfortable yet stylish shoe brand. But the Spanish company is much more and pursues a brand ethos that's both traditional, cultural and fashion forward simultaneously. Proof: Casa Camper, stylish (but laid back) hotels in Barcelona and Berlin that embodies the brand's essence. Ditto for Camper Together which taps up and coming artists to create one-of-a-kind boutiques.


Guinness: Guinness may be 250 years old, but it's acting like a much, much younger marketer. The company has embraced experiential branding both literally and figuratively with its "It's Alive Inside" positioning. For its anniversary, Guinness offered up Remarkable Experiences, including a trip into space. It also released a pub-finder iPhone application with a social media twist. More impressively, the brand created the Guinness Storehouse, a seven-story building that functions as both museum and pub, that has now become one of Ireland's top tourist attractions. And, more recently, Guinness even wired up its rugby team with RFID tags (including balls and players) to capture a whole range of statistics about how fast, powerfully and effectively the game is played.


UNIQLO: Few companies have so used digital like Uniqlo to both build a brand and breakthrough to new consumers -- and on a truly global scale.The Japanese retailer surprises and delights consumers at every turn, whether through innovative iPhone applications, calendars, e-commerce, stylebooks and microsites. Uniqlo's experiential efforts not only express the brand, but reach new consumers who may live thousands of miles away from the nearest retail location.


Virgin America: Virgin America has gone further than most, ensuring that the experience is the marketing -- and advertising in many cases. The brand targeted tech-savvy consumers early on with its Red system entertainment console and in-flight WiFi. It showed off its dramatic interiors in promotions with Diggnation and YouTube celebrities; became an early adopter of Twitter for customer service; and reinforced its brand values through its simple booking engine on VirginAmerica.com. And now, for the holidays, Virgin America is partnering with Google to offer free WiFi for travelers.


Nike: Nike, of course, has been moving in this experiential direction for a few years. 'We're not in the business of keeping the media companies alive,'' Nike's Trevor Edwards told the New York Times in 2007. ''We're in the business of connecting with consumers.'' And so they have. The company continually earns kudos for consumer experience breakthroughs like Nike+, its online running community; the Human Race, a global running event; and more recently the Livestrong Chalkbot which enabled users to submit a text message that would be painted (digitally) on the route of the Tour de France.

Experiences, it would seem, are the new advertising. Experiences reach and engage customers in new and more meaningful ways, they promote "trial" over simply messaging and -- quite frankly -- experiences are much more suited to our digital era when everything is just a click away. Our challenge now, as marketers, is to make sure that our products and brands can actually live up to the experiences that we advertise.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Garrick Schmitt is group VP of experience planning at Razorfish and the agency's global lead for user experience. He publishes FEED, Razorfish's annual digital brand experience report and in his spare time flails about on Twitter @gschmitt.
31 Comments
Subscribe to comments on: The Last Campaign: How Experiences Are Becoming the New Advertising
  By bchiger | New York, NY November 10, 2009 12:04:22 pm:
Absolutely. We've paid lip service to the idea of "holistic marketing" but are only now realizing that "advertising" is becoming much more than just communications strategy.

On our blog I have proposed that advertising has shifted to what I call "engagement design," or the design of branded experiences that add value through many different touchpoints over time.

If you're so inclined, you can read about it at: http://ANidea.com/go/redefineadvertising

Either way, it is good to see agencies (particularly digital and traditional shops who focus on experiences and interactions vs. messages) evolving the dialog on what the new face of advertising needs to be.

Brian Chiger | AgencyNet
www.ANidea.com
@brianchiger
  By rukallstar2 | Minneapolis, MN November 10, 2009 02:14:35 pm:
this is a great article. one word of caution to the previous comment. everyone likes to say they have a new model, when in fact its merely an evolution. yes advertising needs to become more of an experience, but that doesn't mean that's all it will be. last time i checked people like sitting on something and being engaged with a glowing rectangle. make a great spot, people will watch it, or it will get passed around. technology is forcing mediocrity out, on a large scale. mediocrity is alive and strong in small form, just look at all those blogs--how many are truly great? or most of the stuff on youtube? yeah. an interesting question is no one thinks that movies will go away? but everyone feels that ads will? it's time to up our game, and clients to get comfortable with creating content, rather than ads. because really who wants to watch ads?
  By cjrullman | Birmingham, AL November 10, 2009 02:23:21 pm:
the experience sounds somewhat PR to me, which is not a bad thing at all. It just upholds the idea of advertising and PR constantly intertwining. I think that's why many advertising agencies don't want to be limited to being called an "ADVERTISING Agency," because that connotes print ads, billboards, commercials—all the obvious vehicles of getting a message out. We are more so branding agencies, in that we will do anything it takes for our clients to give them that identity they strive for, whether it is subtle PR efforts, interactive websites and social media.

maybe one day we will start calling ourselves 'experience agencies.'

thanks for sharing!

cjr

www.scoutbrand.com
  By bchiger | New York, NY November 10, 2009 02:37:11 pm:
@rukallstar2 I agree that everyone likes to say they have a new model and I also agree this is just an evolution of branding. I never claimed that this was "a new model" or a "revolution." In fact, my precise words were "it is good to see agencies evolving the dialog..." Also, I do not think ads will go away. If you had read my post, you would have realized that I explicitly stated otherwise.

The fact is, the "content over ads" idea has been circulating for quite awhile and it is quite true that people still love the movies (and a good story driven TV spot). But it's important to remember that movies don't have ulterior motives -- they're designed to entertain, not to sell. Ads are NOT movies. But the industry will get a lot closer to producing the kind of engaging brand content you advocate once they recognize that they are creating an experience around their brand, not just designing a "reach vehicle."
  By rodgerbanister | Seattle, WA November 10, 2009 02:38:11 pm:
Great article, but is it really so surprising? Every company wants bonded customers, but many of them skip critical steps in getting there.

I like what Amazon and Virgin are doing - leading with their customers. By providing them with experiences that they want and are on brand, they build bonded customers who pass on their brand experience (whether digital or real world) by WOM, which reduces the need for push advertising.

But there will always be advertising, because so few companies, in my opinion, do a good job of creating bonded customers.
  By bighousegraphix | Savannah, GA November 10, 2009 03:01:09 pm:
Great article. This is a good read for many businesses that are still operating under the advertising as usual model.

Twitter is now replacing the customer service hotline and social media platforms are becoming the new amazon reviews.

One bad review now travels faster than ever before and overall customer experience speaks volumes.
  By lbernste | Toronto, ON November 10, 2009 03:25:36 pm:
Increasingly the idea that the experience is the brand is being understood -- egged on to a great degree by the success of digital and real customer engagement opportunities. The article highlights a few companies that behave in accordance with the post modern maxim: the brand is the experience is the business is the brand. These companies did not invent this (okay, maybe Nike did), but in some cases have taken it to the extreme (to wit Camper, where the company cannot be in the shoe business, but must be in a more ethereal business of selling a brand essence ("We are in the business of selling "laid back comfort" and will wrap it in any physical or digital embodiment that makes sense.

Experience are described in feeling terms -- ask somebody to describe an experience and they generally say something like: "it made me feel..." The "new advertising" is a way of triggering the way the product experience makes people feel when not directly consuming the product. And it works because, as Maya Angelou says: "people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did but people will never forget how you made them feel".
  By grahamhumphreys | New York, NY November 10, 2009 04:37:38 pm:
Garrick,

The article and FEED report both very worthwhile - props for sharing the information.

I feel that the 'experiences, not messages' idea is on course to win through. Which is a good thing. As a marketer, the opportunity to create experiences with intrinsic value for consumers makes me feel like I'm on the side of the Angels for a change. And few folks have been recommending engagement to clients for a while. There have been famous disasters as 'traditionally-minded' brands grapple with the idea of engagement - http://tinyurl.com/phj6h - and there will doubtless be many more.

So as we strategy professionals gird ourselves for the onslaught of demands for 'audience engagement', what's the framework for identifying the nature of the most appropriate vehicle for an engagement? Should it be based on utility, entertainment, information, or some other value-add? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Cheers. Graham
grahamhumphreys.blogspot.com
  By tobyhorry | London, CA November 10, 2009 05:09:35 pm:
How about advertising the experience?
  By metapede | San Francisco, CA November 10, 2009 06:18:59 pm:
I definitely agree with the premise of the article, and there are some good examples here (some, though, are a bit of a stretch). A few of the best examples have been around for quite a while, so I'm not sure Garrick is telling people anything they don't already know.

It would be interesting to hear Garrick's perspective on what the pitfalls are when brands try to create experiences, because there have been some embarrassing failures (BudTV anyone?).

As for the supposedly fashionable belief that advertising is dying (per the first sentence of the article), this just seems silly. I haven't heard any murmurings that suggest this is a fashionable line of thinking. Print is dying maybe. Advertising is shifting to new media, new formats, etc. maybe, but dying?

When a company as big and wealthy as Google still gets something like 98% of its revenue from advertising and pays $750 million to acquire AdMob (an advertising company), I don't know how anyone could say advertising is dying.
  By jerryketel | PORTLAND, OR November 10, 2009 06:40:27 pm:
If you know your history, none of this is news. PT Barnum figured this stuff out over a century ago. Starbucks codified it just a few years ago. If a brand is an emotional relationship between a consumer and a product or service then it stands to reason that an experience can become much more emotional than passive media like print advertising. But let's be clear: this is just another tool in the toolbox. Tactics do not replace strategy. Strategy comes first.

Jerry Ketel
  By gschmitt | San Francisco, CA November 10, 2009 08:15:31 pm:
Thanks for all of the very insightful and thoughtful comments.

I particularly like this, from lbernste, "The "new advertising" is a way of triggering the way the product experience makes people feel when not directly consuming the product. And it works because, as Maya Angelou says: "people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did but people will never forget how you made them feel".

Which I promise to steal, completely ;)

As for the advertising is dying line, metapede, I actually should have qualified that as "traditional" advertising (well cataloged by Bob Garfield http://thechaosscenario.net/blog/ and the like). Not advertising as a whole. My real point is that traditional isn't really dying, but that experiences -- whether online or off -- are having inordinate amount of sway with consumers now. That's the balance that we need to strike (not either/or). And digital is driving a lot of it.

Great thread. Look forward to seeing how the conversation evolves.
  By brandon101 | Atlanta, GA November 10, 2009 10:55:18 pm:
Garrick - loving the thinking here. I think perhaps some of this is semantics, but I would submit that perhaps what's no longer as effective is traditional interruptive, one-way Advertising, which is what we typically think of when the word Advertising is used. Mass media used to tell us what the experience of the brand was and we either believed it or not (to a large degree dependent on how effective the Creative was and how big the ad budget was), but now we have endless opportunities to learn about and experience brands outside of the carefully crafted 30 second spot. To your point, it's the experiences that are winning, not necessarily the advertising that is dying.

Advertising is adapting, and necessarily so. There are plenty of ways to integrate social components into more traditional ads, and we're sure to see more of that in the near future. Holistic campaigns will take advantage of all available mediums and weave together a compelling story that grabs consumer attention and builds trust. I believe the real issue that lies underneath all of this is that the brand proposition has to live up to all of the hype or else it's set up to fail. Word travels instantly now, and people smell bullshit a mile away. The brands you referenced above aren't just saying 'we get it' in commercials - they are living it and their efforts are resonating with consumers. This is the model for future success.

Thanks for the discussion, and especially for the outstanding work on the FEED report. Hats off to you and your team.

- Brandon Sutton
  By MATSNL65 | LOS ANGELES, CA November 11, 2009 03:38:34 am:
A great article Garrick as well as a great insightful study with your latest report in FEED 2009. We (curious creative marketing types) have spoken with various people who are the focus of most of our marcom labor (we call them consumers) and found that the best of just in the interactive/digital space will remember that there isn't any difference between we who enjoy experiences and we do create experiences. Those of us who can bridge the gap between that fundamental human magic of today's and future digital experiences and the business realities of those who pay us to create them will truly have proved how this era of experiential marketing can form the foundation of what is to come.

Langston Richardson / LangstonRichardson.com/ twitter: @MATSNL65
  By ianmcg | Boston, MA November 11, 2009 08:11:40 am:
Hey Garrick,
Great article. Thanks so much for the great discussion. I'd like to hone in on your engagement point. At the end of the day what truly differentiates experiential marketing from traditional advertising is brand engagement with audiences. Its about the conversation and the mutual exchange of value. Shared experiences drive emotional and rational affinity, establish trust and drive long-term relationships. For brands, engagement is not an option, its a must. The most potent campaigns are those which employ both online and face-to-face experiences, but it all needs to start with strategy. The optimum mix is the holy grail for marketers.

To read more, please check out my blog: Experiential Marketing 2.0.

Thanks!

Ian McGonnigal
Blog: http://www.experientialmarketing20.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/iandavmcg
  By Kevin | New York, NY November 11, 2009 09:25:09 am:
Garrick:

I was curious as to why this was posted in the "Digital Next" section seeing as so few of your examples had anything to do with the interwebs. To wit, most of your examples (and i agree with one poster - many are quite dated: see Nike+) reference offline media. The only thing you cited online for RedBull was a blog?

You followed it up with a comment response saying "And digital is driving a lot of it." I don't see it here.

And once again, more unnecessary fuel for the unnecessary online vs. offline tug-of-war, spoiling a rather excellent topic overall.

Kevin Horne - NYC
  By kevinlenard | Toronto, ON November 11, 2009 09:44:48 am:
Garrick has zeroed in on exactly where marketing, strategically, is in the process of evolving to. All the hoopla about "social" is just a tactical blip on the radar, sucking dollars from digital and one-on-one engaging brand experiences because people have kind of (barely) wrapped their minds around what it is.

What continually amazes me about human nature is that we are constantly 're-discovering' and 're-inventing' the obvious -- things we all know already, then evangelizing like we've discovered the Holy Grail. The most powerful selling (marketing) tool humans have had since we first traded sea shells for bear claws was what Fast Company's panel of marketing experts have called the "new age" of one-on-one marketing, like we've collectively forgotten why we all like going to the farmers' market every weekend. What all the above speaks to is a combination of real and digital (and myriad other) experiences between consumers and brands.

What's most ironic is that "social", with no proven ROI of any kind, is now getting millions (billions?) of media mix dollars diverted to it, while live, face-to-face experiential marketing efforts continue to be marginalized as too expensive and unproven by any ROI metric, yet we all know having a chat with a knowledgeable and engaging Brand Ambassador is going to trump any virtual experience virtually every time.

XM is the new ATL: http://tinyurl.com/yf47efx and "advertising agencies" now have to become "marketing agencies": http://tinyurl.com/yfx3zpm
  By tillypick | Manchester, MA November 11, 2009 10:24:46 am:
The marketing business has always been about a dialogue with consumers. It's just that we now have exponentially greater opportunities for that dialogue to be more contextual, deeper and create more value. The challenge that comes with more options and greater choice is picking the best path and navigating between hype and paralysis to do the right thing for your consumer, because if you don't add value to their experience, you're toast.

I also feel that our world today is much more about hybrids than the extremes. (Remember that word from the 90's -- mass customization?) I'd say that anyone that is on the ends of the spectrum and pushing one model versus another is either not brave enough or smart enough to work with the complete truth.
  By djpitzner | Harrisburg, PA November 11, 2009 10:40:14 am:
The last sentence was a hard stop for me: "Our challenge now, as marketers, is to make sure that our products and brands can actually live up to the experiences that we advertise."

This tidbit is really the crux of the equation, don't you think? Agencies only have so much sway over this critical point. It's the client-side marketers and executives who need to grasp its importance. Some do, as you noted -- Amazon, Zappos, Virgin. And that's why their marketing and advertising efforts are paying back. They understand "alignment, relevancy and authenticity" and (with their agencies) find creative ways to deliver on their brand promise all day long, every day.

Great experiential marketing can affect trial for any product. It can improve the connection for brands that do deliver. But it cannot guarantee loyalty. Only the product itself can pull consumers through for the long run.

So, as agencies, we have to choose our clients wisely or go through the difficult and painful process of educating their entire organization, from top to bottom, to deliver products & service that live up to the hype they want to project.

--Dori Pitzner
http://www.andculture.com
@doriorio
  By KIRK | NEW YORK, NY November 11, 2009 11:42:45 am:
Somewhere up there, someone said people love movies but "movies don't sell anything." That, of course, is wrong and misses the point. Movies sell themselves, primarily. That's what they're all about. And the most effective way of getting people to buy a movie ticket is to tell them a little story that embodies the bigger story they'll get to see if they pay.

Brands and their content need to bear the same relationship to one another. Brands need to tell stories online or anywhere else that embody the promises, attributes and attitudes of the brands. That's EMBODY. Not describe or hawk or merely reflect. I come from an agency called Story, so you might expect this philosophy from me. But it's true. Digital is all-important because all content is migrating to digital platforms. But the really critical word there is content, not digital, because digital can be just as irrelevant as a TV spot if it's not conveying a valuable story.

The real task now is to turn brands into great media across all channels. Great media generates great experiences. And the magic that's driving accelerated changes in advertising is the simple fact that great content, amplified through what we currently call social media, can command a bigger, more responsive audience for FREE than a spot on all the traditional TV networks combined. So even ignoring the fact far fewer people watch TV ads anymore, the economics of old-fashioned advertising just don't work.

Kirk Cheyfitz
http://postadvertising.com/default.aspx
  By imagreatcopywriter | Bronxville, NY November 11, 2009 01:34:28 pm:
This is spot on! I was working on a campaign at my internship last summer and it required a lot of consumer reaction and behavior analysis. What I found is that people are more willing to spend money on an experience than on a product. For example, a family may not spend the money on a new kitchen, but that same year, they will go sky diving or head off to an exotic vacation for five days. The public's values are shifting, probably because our economy's are as well. People are uneasy about the price of goods, not knowing if their values will shift up or down in the future, but an experience is something that can't deteriorate in value, and this is what's, I think, the real reason for this "Experience over Product" trend.
Other great things for a company to do is throw events (just make sure the guests have a great time!)Not only does this get free marketing buzz, before and after the event, but it ties your company name in with an experience the consumer went through. And, with the consumer being more and more savvy today, this is good, because it allows THEM to think they are deciding to like and enjoy your company or the event now connected to it.We can't tell the consumer what to think anymore, we just need to show them why our products or services benefit their lifestyle.
  By foggedout | Jersey City, NJ November 11, 2009 02:43:55 pm:
A lot of the articles and blogs I've read regarding this shift away from traditional advertising and branding have spoken about it in a 'doom and gloom', 'end of an era', hell, industry tone. The first and last paragraph of this article are the focus of my thoughts and the reason I think it's a great time to be a creative individual. Clients are now being forced to be more open to that BIG IDEA mantra our community has been touting since the dawn of the biz. No more 2D concepts that get forced into a rollout of the common media tactics. The last sentence says NOW our challenge will be to make sure our brands live up to the experience we advertise. That was ALWAYS the challenge. Your brand won't live if it can't do what it claims it can do. A strategy to engage is key, but then you still have to communicate once you've got their attention. That's why I think our careers are headed towards enhancement, not endangerment.

Jason Carapellotti
http://www.absurdcreative.com
jasoncarapellotti.com (coming soon)
  By stclark | Los Angeles, CA November 11, 2009 08:47:06 pm:
It indeed isn't anything truly new, but is worth repeating. Very good article and packaging of the concept.
I think fundamentally though, that at the core of the experiential framework that triggers effectiveness, in fact all communication platforms, is the existence of an idea. I come across dozens of experience based environments that simply have no meaning, depth or purpose. I call it clutter.
We seem to be getting lost in running after emerging channels, art form, production techniques and other tactical plays, rather than focus on the generation of an organizing idea that fits. And it doesn't have to be big or small to qualify either. Any size will do, just as long as it is relevant and meaningful to the intended.

www.sagebranddirections.com
  By david | Boston, MA November 12, 2009 12:11:17 am:
Great article and I agree that it's not as much about traditional advertising losing steam (although it's happening in certain contexts) it's about more brands realizing the efficacy of experience marketing.

In fact, to that point, the one minor disagreement I have with the article is the notion that experience marketing is new. It's been around for decades... I'm nearly 30 years into it personally, and when I got in, I sat at the feet of those then more senior in order to learn what they knew from doing it for decades before me. One such person had created an experiential marketing campaign for Ford that toured the country in the 1970's. And there are examples that pre-date that campaign to be sure.

What's new is the degree to which it is being embraced now, the number of agencies specializing (or trying to specialize) in it, and the expanded definition of what it is, especially now with the integration of digital tactics that enrich the interaction so valuably in both face-to-face and online experiences. It feels like the time has finally arrived for experience in a really big way, and that is a new and welcome sensation.
  By david | Boston, MA November 12, 2009 12:14:16 am:
Great article and I agree that it's not as much about traditional advertising losing steam (although it's happening in certain contexts) it's about more brands realizing the efficacy of experience marketing.

In fact, to that point, the one minor disagreement I have with the article is the notion that experience marketing is new. It's been around for decades... I'm nearly 30 years into it personally, and when I got in, I sat at the feet of those then more senior in order to learn what they knew from doing it for decades before me. One such person had created an experiential marketing campaign for Ford that toured the country in the 1970's. And there are examples that pre-date that campaign to be sure.

What's new is the degree to which it is being embraced now, the number of agencies specializing (or trying to specialize) in it, and the expanded definition of what it is, especially now with the integration of digital tactics that enrich the interaction so valuably in both face-to-face and online experiences. It feels like the time has finally arrived for experience in a really big way, and that is a new and welcome sensation.

David M. Rich
SVP, Program Strategy/Worldwide
George P. Johnson Experience Marketing
david.rich@gpj.com
www.gpj.com
  By rsegelbaum | Toronto, ON November 12, 2009 09:08:02 am:
A great article. And yes, I entirely agree that the online world has been a bit of a must to the experience level...after all, they are an online entity, but we have been seeing more and more bricks and mortar shift to a bricks and clicks mentality for the last seven years or so. Be it an online experience in store (think kiosk doing e-comm within a store location) to sponsorship of events pushing registrants to the web to engage. And now, more than ever, with more and more social media being a mobile reality, the real time engagement of online and offline is constant. The question lends to the aftermarket launch measurement and valuation post the experience has passed. Like ads, are people still talking about it, without being prodded to do so?
  By 1day1brand | Toronto, ON November 12, 2009 01:48:43 pm:
Top notch post.

Couldn't agree more. This is why I've always loved digital. It was about the experience. Not just pushing product. It is the reason I've always felt like an outsider in the world of advertising. Now the world of advertising finally gets to die or change to our way of thinking.

BTW, the Red Bull "Crashed Ice" poster is one of the best ever. I'm not even into Hockey (don't tell any of my friends here in the Great White North) but it just drew me in the first time I saw it. Made me want to be see more of the crazy - death defying experience t promised.

-- Axle

Axle Davids | www.twitter.com/1day1brand | www.distility.com
  By Jocelyn | Austin, TX November 12, 2009 05:55:55 pm:
For those who are wondering what the next step is in creating a "brand experience," I *highly* recommend BRAND sense by Martin Lindstrom. Building powerful brands through taste, touch, smell, sight, sound.
  By belovedxp | Orlando, FL November 12, 2009 10:53:48 pm:
Garrick, thanks for providing such a great article which has sparked some equally great commentary. I especially liked the one from David Rich, although one may say I am biased due to the fact that George P. Johnson is a fellow experiential marketing agency. As he stated, the methodology of experience based marketing is nothing new. When I am invited to speak on the subject of experiential marketing, I often say that building relationships with people through memorable experiences is simply part of human nature. Once brands display human personality traits, they are able to develop personal and meaningful connections with consumers.

Traditional advertising will not die but it will evolve, like all other forms of marketing, in order to remain relevant. I have seen numerous television spots which creatively evoke emotion and cause consumers to share the spots via YouTube. And with experiential marketing being part of the overall marketing strategy, traditional advertising gains greater relevance and attention from its intended audience.

Lastly, while your article focuses on the digital side of experience marketing, it's important to note that one on one experiential marketing is very powerful and delivers a personal human experience which a digital format cannot. However, the increased interest in SMM and new media has helped to further the case for engagement and experience marketing.
  By belovedxp | Orlando, FL November 12, 2009 10:57:27 pm:
Garrick, thanks for providing such a great article which has sparked some equally great commentary. I especially liked the one from David Rich, although one may say I am biased due to the fact that George P. Johnson is a fellow experiential marketing agency. As he stated, the methodology of experience based marketing is nothing new. When I am invited to speak on the subject of experiential marketing, I often say that building relationships with people through memorable experiences is simply part of human nature. Once brands display human personality traits, they are able to develop personal and meaningful connections with consumers.

Traditional advertising will not die but it will evolve, like all other forms of marketing, in order to remain relevant. I have seen numerous television spots which creatively evoke emotion and cause consumers to share the spots via YouTube. And with experiential marketing being part of the overall marketing strategy, traditional advertising gains greater relevance and attention from its intended audience.

Lastly, while your article focuses on the digital side of experience marketing, it's important to note that one on one experiential marketing is very powerful and delivers a personal human experience which a digital format cannot. However, the increased interest in SMM and new media has helped to further the case for engagement and experience marketing.

Wagner
President/CEO
Beloved Experiential
wagner@belovedxp.com
blog.belovedxp.com
  By Linas | London November 13, 2009 10:34:35 am:
Some very interesting comments on "experience and engagement" marketing. However, I feel this is all coming very late to the party. All these mainstream brands are jubilant to the fact that they have now embraced experience!

I totally agree with David M. Rich, this is nothing new, what many people are embracing now is what has already been done. It is just a truck load easier going digital.

Let us go back to the year 2000 in Central and Eastern Europe. A time when a majority of these countries aspiring to join the European Union, placed an entire ban on tobacco advertising, this of course included all electronic media and communication. All that we had left as Restricted Market, advertising practitioners was experiential, engagement and very limited direct. Certainly no digital.

Many brands and their agencies have sat around and have waited for "experiential and engagement" to evolve around them, whereas, tobacco category communication craftspeople had to be the explorers of new communication with consumers. Especially in Europe and about 10 years ago, that is all that we spoke about, "BRAND EXPERIENCE" and delivering like no other brand could.

I still strongly believe that in restricted markets, the agencies and client brand people involved, have been at the forging point of "experiential and engagement" marketing and continue to be at the fore of consumer dialogue.

Going all "tech" just makes it a walk in the park!

Linas Valaitis
Director
Baltix Limited
linas@baltix.net
:

Note: Comments submitted to AdAge.com are posted automatically and will include the user name with which you registered. Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature. Comments may be used in the print edition at editorial discretion. Comments are restricted to 500 words or less.




Stay on top of the news and stay ahead of the game—sign up for e-mail newsletters now!



Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News