Weekend Thought: You're So Vain

Well hello again!

I’ve taken what seems like the longest break of my life in between newsletters.

For you, it was probably a relief.

For me, it’s felt like an eternity.

So let’s get to it. First our sponsor:

Octaviano Cesar is today’s sponsor. A couple of interesting things about Octaviano:

• He works under me on two of my teams at Noble People

• He’s an incredibly hard working and kind individual

• He’s got an air of mystery, sort of in a James Bond way

• He’s a great guy, and is extremely curious about media, marketing, and how to succeed

Is it unethical for me to take $5 from a direct report and have them sponsor my side hustle newsletter? Absolutely. Which is why I’ll be buying Octaviano a coffee next week with the $5 he venmo’d me. Check, mate.

Anyway, let’s think. I have so many thoughts from the last 2 weeks that I haven’t been able to string together, so a brain dump is most certainly coming.

For example, Suits is now on Netflix and is blowing up - yet it had already been on Peacock, and nobody cared.

How fucking embarrassing for Peacock!

(There is more to this story we will explore in a future newsletter).

But until then, here is today’s thought on why brand narcissism is good…

Weekend Thought

Well, it happened again.

A fat finger fuckup.

I’ve seen a few in my day. Someone pushed one too many buttons and poof, there goes the media budget.

It happens more than you think. And it’s never great.

I’ve seen it happen at least 3 times. Most recently on a client I manage, where one of our media partners effed up.

They spent a bunch of money in one day, when they weren’t supposed to.

They took responsibility and made it whole.

Maybe someone is going to bear the brunt.

But it reminded me of something I think about when I analyze the competition.

Brands, especially small ones, are obsessed with their competitors.

Seeing the fat cats in the category get bigger is infuriating, especially when they do it by resting on their laurels vs. fueling innovation.

As such, agencies are always responsible for reporting on the competition.

What they’re doing. What they’re focused on. What they’re spending on.

And recommendations on what to do because of what they’re doing.

The problem is is that tools that read-out on competitive media spend are bad.

They’re incomplete. They’re usually wildly off, saying brands spend in the hundreds of thousands when they actually spend in the millions.

They take a long time to report, sometimes 2-3 months after the marketing has run.

They report on some media channels decently like TV, but can’t report on others well, like social and search, which, I don’t know, make up close to 50% of paid media spend.

But, they we are. Hypothesizing on what the competition is thinking, using incomplete datasets, combining directional data with intuition and imagination.

Sometimes, you’re able to come up with some pretty good stuff. Overarching themes. Large changes in budget direction. A new audience. A new market.

But sometimes you’re left scratching your head.

Why did their new campaign feature a media buy in San Jose?

Why did they start spending on this completely random website?

Oh my god, why did they spend SO MUCH in that one week?

You’re stumped, assuming that the competition is so smart, so savvy, they are seeing something you’re not seeing.

But in reality - these things happen, not because of a new strategy.

It’s because of “strategy.”

That media buy in San Jose? The CEO lives there.

The team wanted to make sure they saw the new campaign, so they bought a billboard near their house.

That random website? Friend of the CMO’s.

They started out together in agency life. Now they do wink wink, handshake deals.

Oh, and that week of SO MUCH spend? A fuck up.

A huge fuck up.

Someone fat fingered the platform.

Nothing strategic, only an apology email.

We get so focused on the competition that we lose sight of who we should really be focusing on.

Not, not our customers. They are important, but we often care about what they think a little too much as well.

No - we need our brands to focus a bit more on theirselves.

Just like a lover who can’t be a worthy companion in a relationship until they care about themselves, our brands will never be the best they can be unless they really know who they are.

What they stand for. What their dreams are. What they bring to the market that’s different and better than the competition.

And those product truths can unlock whitespaces, opportunities, audiences, markets, much more than just taking what the competition is ignoring or leaving on the table.

Adam Morgan talks about this in Eat The Big Fish and Simon Sink in The Infinite Game. Focusing too much on the competition leads you astray, stuck in a finite game of resources.

The goal is to create a brand that stands for something, that is agnostic of customers’ wants because they don’t even know what they want, and to be a lighthouse brand that can be seen and admired by many.

And it starts with being self-loving, even narcissistic, about what your brand stands for, instead of focusing too much on the competition.

It’s like Hillary in 2016 - she ran too much on an Anti-Trump platform, instead of what she stood for.

And then we had to suffer 4 years through the proof of why focusing too much on the competition is BAD.

So, build a brand from the truths of the actual company and product and service you provide.

From the values and principles you stand for.

Love it, cherish it, marry it, be narcissistic about it.

And hopefully, if you’ve done your work right, the market will respond.

And when you do nail what your brand stands for, try not to fat finger anything as you promote it.

Or else, your competitors might think you’re up to something.

Stay thinkin,

Danny