The future's in the palm of your hand

Literally too.

The following presentation is a 104-page long assertion (with a 12-page disclaimer!) by Morgan Stanley on how internet usage is migrating from desktops to mobile devices.

I don't agree with everything they say. But the writing is on the wall is fairly legible: The future is mobile internet. And advertising's role in it is... well, changing.

The slide on desktop internet revenues:


The slide on mobile internet revenues:


And for those with patience, here's the whole shindig:

Morgan Stanley - The Mobile Internet Report - Summary 2010

View more documents from Andrei Marinescu.

With the domain evolving at the pace it is, I really can't say if the NEXT BIG THING is an app, a platform or a device. Or a combo. But I do believe it will be more local (geographic saliency). It will probably be mCommerce-centric (remember, payments can now be made through a mobile without a credit/debit card!).

And it'll probably catch a lot of us 'internet savvy' advertising professional completely unawares!

There may be a way out... but we'll have to give up our self-destructive mania for being medium specific. But I think that thought deserves a post all it's own.

'Ctrl Z' in real life

Tell me about it!

I had overstretched myself for more than a week on an ambitious project. Everything was chugging along fine too - till someone spotted a silly mistake on the morning of the presentation! A mistake that could potentially put paid to several days of hard work by a dozen people. A mistake that perhaps I could have prevented if was a little more observant.

I sat there with my heart in my throat, fractically calling my editor, and praying that it be set right in time... I mean going down in a blaze of glory is one thing. But over a 'spello'? Eew!

It was touch and go. But we made it. Just.

Phew!

MY HEROES OF THE DAY: Waleed and Subhash for spotting the goof-up; Saif for pulling 24 hours straight without a wink and then dragging himself back from bed to the editing studio, Fahad for driving over 15km to-and-fro 4 times - Oh, and God for everything else!

(Hope we get this. Insha-allah.)

Google gobbles!

A 2009 ranking of the most valuable sporting properties by SportsPro Magazine (published by the Henley Media Group) placed the National Football League (NFL) as the world's most valuable sports property at $4.5 billion.

Remember Apple's '1984' commercial aired once - just once - on NFL Superbowl.

The NFL is followed by Major League Baseball at $3.9 billion, National Basketball Association (NBA) at $3.35 billion, and Nascar at $1.9 billion. All from the US of A.

At No.5 comes the Indian Premier League (IPL) at $1.6 billion. After a mere two years of existence, it may be recalled that IPLs' 2nd edition resuscitated the Indian Ad industry (and its economy, to some extend) during a rough year.

Well, the 3rd edition of Indian Premier League (IPL) will be streamed live (ok, 5 minutes after TV) on www.youtube.com/ipl.

Google has bought the online rights for IPL content for the next two years. It'll share sponsorship and advertising revenues with IPL.

Um... does anyone else hear a 'search engine' revving?

Is being stupid, thinking different?

Diesel's new 'Be Stupid' campaign brings to mind Apple's 'Think Different' campaign. After all, both are in open defiance of conventional thinking.

Apple's campaign, in the 80s, followed the fashion of the age and relied on hindsight to make its point. Diesel follows the present day assumption that - well, everybody's got some talent (at least enough to get them on reality TV)!

Let's see the ads again...

First up, Apple usurping Gandhi's ideals.



And then, Diesel exhorting us to turn into imbeciles.



So is the thinking different? Or am I just stupid?

Does your name embarrass you?

Frankly, mine did. Till I gained the maturity to realise that the really important thing is what that name stands for, not how it's spelt or pronounced (or in my case, mispronounced). I thought: Bonaparte. Dickens. Pele. Tata. FAG (don't snigger, google "Schaeffler Group").

Perhaps, I was wrong.

The venerable South India-based 'Dhanalakshmi Bank' has changed it's name to a more contemporary, 'Dhanlaxmi Bank' in a bid to appeal to the youth! (http://www.afaqs.com/perl/news/story.html?sid=26018)

Apparently, name-sensitivity among the youth is ubiquitous and universal.

In another nomenclature-based attempt by a financial institution to reach out to the youth, the trillion-dollar 'Charles Schwab Corporation' in the US informs us that it would henceforth, prefer to be addressed simply, as 'Chuck'. (http://dognpony.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/ohmygod-like-chuck-is-sooooo-rad/)

My question to these cool, hip, and obviously with-it, financiers is only this: If an average 18-25yr old were to come by $100, would he/she be more likely to: a.) invest, or b.) buy an iPhone?

Take your time.

But what I really like about Dnlxmi Bnk's (honestly, isn't this more 'in'?) new identity is it's all-encompassing functionality. Supposedly, the new identity "exudes a modern, vibrant and contemporary look while retaining the core values of trust and heritage built by the bank over its long history".

No, it's not over... "The new identity reflects the Bank’s growth aspirations in the context of evolving demographics of the young India. Retaining the brands core strengths and values, the new identity is aligned to attitudinal position of today’s youth - modern yet rooted in tradition”.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you create an identity for yourself. By being indistinguishable.

But seriously, is there an all-pervasive software that writes 'new brand identity' PRs?

What if you don't need an Ad Agency to do Advertising?

There is something wrong with advertising today.

Suspicion.

I think the problem is three-fold:
1. Marketing exercises tend to be media-specific
2. There is a plethora of media available today
3. It is unviable for an Ad Agency to retain experts in every domain

As a result, the overall thought-process tends to get funnelled toward the familiar, the conventional. Leaving numerous possibilities unexplored - and leaving everyone involved rather suspicious of each other's capability, commitment and interest!

Could there be a better way? I'll hazard a wild swing at this...

Suppose - just suppose - there was a lean, result-focussed, media-neutral Agency+Brand team constituted solely to identify strategic opportunities. The alliance is exclusive and closed-ended. There is no scope for a conflict of interest here.

And now suppose there is a loose, open-ended federation of execution experts wedded to no client - freelancers, if you will - who are commissioned based on skill (or available budget) to draw-up, co-ordinate and execute the various media facets of a campaign.

In short... What if you don't need a traditional, and usually awkwardly, joined-at-the-hip Strategy and Creative team to do Advertising?

What if, eh?

Would you pay a hairstylist, and then cut your own hair?

The retainership fee seems to bestow upon some marketers the right to demand absurdity. By innumerable iterations and dissections-by-committee, clients get quantity, not quality. When the agency is forced to shift focus from 'effectiveness' to 'approval', the client gets the equivalent of a DIY haircut.

Can there be a more equitable model - where the agency is better involved in helping the client turn a profit?