Houston, we have an (image) problem. (Part 2)

Pass the Courvoisier

When I was growing up Cognac was considered to be more of an old fuddy-duddy drink than Scotch. And compared to the pronunciation of 'Courvoisier', 'Bruichladdich' seems simple.

But now it’s the hip drink of the gangsta-wannabe - and every15 year old can pronounce it. How’d that happen?

This from a 2003 Wall Street Journal Article:

Behind this trend are the likes of Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Snoop Dogg and other rappers who have embraced the pricey brandy with the 300-year history as a status symbol. That has spawned a cult cognac following among young urban blacks, who mix the liquor in new cocktails with names like "Thug Passion" and "French Connection."...

The U.S. imported 3.7 million cases of cognac last year, up from 1.3 million in 1993, accounting for 36% of the world-wide market. Hennessy, the biggest cognac brand in the U.S., with 53% of the market, says young blacks now account for 60% to 85% of its U.S. sales. That surge in consumption has helped the roughly 20,000 Cognac-area inhabitants whose livelihoods depend on the cognac trade...

Am I suggesting that someone make Scotch the next hip-hop status symbol? Well, if your goal is to sell a lot of it quickly, by creating a fad-based demand, then, er…yes. But there are better ways to achieve increased and longer-term sales without resorting to that tactic.

How to market this stuff?

In the UK some smart marketer decided to take three different single malts, mix them, put them in an attractive bottle, give it a funky name and an equally funky web site and push it heavily in some of the nicer bars and clubs in London. That smart marketer works for William Grant and the product is Monkey Shoulder.

In the US, some marketer decided to take a great single malt whisky and create a campaign using a character that looks like the unholy love-child of a New Yorker cartoon and Dilbert. That marketer also works for William Grant and the product is Balvenie.

Copyranter, an incredibly blunt (and often hysterical) ad critic (and professional advertising copywriter), holds a particular hatred for The Balvenie Guy (whom he refers to as the "Balvenie Weenie"). He takes great delight in abusing the Balvenie ads. He invites his readers to supply their own captions for each ad.

His thoughts on The Balvenie Guy:

This mouthless dillweed is, in my expert adguy opinion, the worst ad icon in history. Worse than Snuggle. Worse than Mr. Opportunity. He lives in his mother's basement, makes very small online trades, and jerks off to online office porn while wearing his one suit and one bow tie and sipping his Balvenie and eating the Hamburger Helper his mommy made.

Do his words sound rough? Well I didn't print some of his other comments, and believe me they were far more blunt. Consider this - In addition to hating Balvenie Guy, Copyranter hates scotch. Copyranter works in advertising. Copyranter may have worked on one of your campaigns.

Balvenie is one of my favorite whiskies. Balvenie Guy is one of my least favorite advertising "spokesman". Maybe my dad found Balvenie Guy entertaining; I think the brand deserves better.

You want to sell Scotch to a younger crowd in bars and clubs? Copy the Monkey Shoulder play book.
You want to not sell Scotch to a younger crowd in any bars and clubs? Copy Balvenie's approach.

Lesson: Want to sell more? Stop selling to my Dad and start selling to me.

Stop with the kilts already

In the UK, most whisky companies have moved away from the tartan and castle imagery – choosing instead to go with more subtle messages designed to attract the elusive under-40 drinkers. Why treat the US market any differently?

Maybe 10 years ago when BraveHeart was in theaters, it was a good move to wear kilts to promote Scotch, but get with the times. That starts by not equating the sale of Scotch whisky primarily (and sometimes exclusively) with the "selling of Scotland". Start selling on taste and lifestyle...and yes you can also sell Scotland.

What do industry people think Americans think of Scotch?

I asked a number of industry people to answer this question:

"What do YOU think that Americans (who don't drink it) think of Scotch whisky"?

Their interesting and varied comments are below, along with my comments:

Here’s one blunt (and on-target) view of the perception that is believed to be wide-spread among us “Yanks”:

“It’s brown; it’s industrial-strength; and relies on Scottish imagery to sell it."

Quite to the point.

"I have come across people who simply prefer to drink a home grown, i.e. U.S. produced drink, and gravitated to bourbon an suchlike." 

While I can't argue that these people exist, they certainly are not the entire American market. Outside of the south, Bourbon is not nearly as popular as you would be led to believe (though its popularity is growing) - and Tequila, Rum and Vodka (definitely not “home-grown”) are quite popular.

"Women in this group often take the view that Scotch is too male orientated and thus steer of it."

True, but not specific to American women.

"I firmly believe that the perception of Scotch whisky is positive amongst the American marketplace. It is viewed as an expensive product for those who appreciate the finer things in life and are willing to pay for them. They appreciate the history and heritage and feel that there is a level of care and craft in its production."

Among existing Scotch drinkers, this is absolutely true - but what about the rest of the market? Are you selling to your "base" or trying to expand your market?

"Some simply have not tried it because they regard it as passe - Dad's drink - and thus unfashionable for their age group. Some even eschew Scotch whisky because they regard it - wrongly in my estimation - as too sophisticated."

Now you're getting it...

"I think in the States and Canada there is this belief that whisk(e)y can be generalised by being the preserve of the heavy drinker; the shooter; the cowboy; redneck; even those with a drinking problem."

This is someone who understands what they are up against.

"I think the general market in the US has a very vague notion of what Scotch whisky actually is, and how it differs from 'home grown' whiskeys. They tend to associate it with obvious icons of "Scottishness" such as Highland cattle in a misty glen, bagpipers playing by a loch with a castle in the background etc, and that's about it. There is almost certainly very little understanding of the differences between blend and malt, but then again, how many UK consumers would have the faintest clue how bourbon or rye differed from Scotch..."

Great understanding - now it is time to start altering that perception.

"I believe most non Scotch drinking Americans view the category as old and irrelevant - something my Dad drinks. That is not to say that Scotch could not be interesting but that they have never been motivated or intrigued to try it."

Exactly my point. So if YOU realize this, why not market it differently?

"Have you ever tried to decipher a single malt shelf, all those brands just makes it intimidating and there are easier choices to make."

Spot on. Remember this is someone IN the industry making this comment.

"I think as well that the whole heritage angle has become a blur - an irrelevance because every brand must have some heritage. The brands that have tried to break from this have also lost the plot - Glenfiddich and Brock Savage???"

Excellent points! (I had not heard of "Brock Savage" until this email. UGGH).

"I am truly optimistic that there remains a fantastic opportunity because actually when introduced to their Dad's drink - many are absolutely bowled over by the flavour, the romance, the authenticity, the sheer unfussiness of this great drink compared to the marketing trickery of white spirits. But someone has to find a way to make the soul of Scotch connect with this audience - a tough challenge but one that forward thinking companies are looking at!"

Absolutely.

I am sure that the issue with marketing is that is is failing to address the knowledge gap that most Americans have with regard to the liquid. The marketing focuses on meaningless statements about being individual when it does not tell you about why it is so special and how to appreciate it and why you should treat yourself. It is following the mindless marketing of standard FMCG (ed. "fast-moving consumer goods") products and assuming a lot of existing knowledge - which is failing to educate the future consumers. Bar people and retailers are the usual first port of call for a scotch experience and they need to be educated to a general standard to support the marketing efforts.

Yes. Education is the key.

The Scotch market, and by this I mean Single Malts, is like the Vodka market was 15 - 20 years ago. Non drinkers were/are wondering what all the fuss is about, but at the same time curious to get involved. It is becoming a "cool" drink to order and "cool" to know about the category.

Marketing needs to be careful; it is not just about showing half naked women with big racks. As we see from the large national shows, women are becoming more involved and the old liquor mentality of marketing needs to change. It's a sophisticated category that needs to be treated as such. I wonder if the behemoth suppliers get that point.

Absolutely. Marketers must attempt to look hip without resorting to the "Bacardi By Night" approach

I think......

• That most Americans are turning to bourbon which is being marketed
  strongly using the "small batch" approach.
• That most Americans think of scotch as a WWII beverage and not current
  or hip.
• That most Americans think that Johnny Walker is the pinnacle of whisky
  offerings.
• I also think that the trend is poised to introduce more flavorful
  spirits to the American public who has been imbibing vodka for a few
  decades now and ready for a change. Probably will start with aged rums,
  and migrate toward whisky.
• I also think that if more American beer drinkers realized the
  relationship between beer and scotch they would be more inclined to give
  it a try!

As you can see, what I am saying is not news to these guys. So where is the breakdown?

Be careful to whom you entrust your brand

Advertising is a strange art. Often the creative folks come up with an ad that is memorable - but in no way highlights the actual product. We can all recall great ads, but are a little fuzzy on the products.

Having a great ad that wins awards does not necessarily sell your product.

In a worst-case scenario a Scotch company puts their fate in the hands of the same folks who market gum, car and Miller Beer – unfortunately, these people don’t chew gum (they smoke), don’t drive cars (they take subways), and don’t drink Miller (they drink wine). Nor do they drink whisky.

Ad agencies bring their biases to advertising – they think Scotch is the drink of older men...and create ads accordingly. They treat Scotch like all other consumer packaged goods - and create ads accordingly.

They know absolutely nothing about Scotch whisky, whisky drinkers, the company they are creating ads for, or anything about the company’s products. Choosing one of these agencies confuses me because I would assume that product and audience knowledge would be among the important factors in the selection of your ad agency. Instead, the fact that they created a Clio award winning ad for tires, becomes their ticket to the world of whisky.

Of course there are some standouts - but most Scotch print ads look alike - Bottle Shot in front of an out-of focus misty glen or castle; and a quote from some obscure "expert" talking about how good it is.

Now of course this isn't true of all ad agencies, (And I know several brands with excellent agencies) but you are putting your brand at risk when you hire a firm that doesn't understand your product, the existing market, or the potential market. Don't entrust your future to someone who doesn't have the same commitment as you do. Don't entrust your brand's future to someone who thinks a cartoon in the Wall Street Journal equals good marketing. Choose someone who is straight-forward and isn't afraid to tell you "It's time to retire the cartoon".

Choose wisely.

Comments

[Some Industry Guy]

That was, by far one of the most blunt and insightful reviews of the state of advertising in the Scotch whisky industry that I have ever read.

Bravo!

[docholiday]

When I discovered Scotch whisky some time ago, one of the things that intrigued me most is the non-commercial feel to it. Instead of Wild Turkey, Grey Goose, and Skyy, you have names like Laphroig, Lagavulin, Ardbeg, etc, etc. The distillery names speak to something real, with extensive history and characters behind them, and are just calling out for you to learn more.

[Frank V]

It's funny that one of the responses mentioned in the article was "That most Americans think that Johnny Walker is the pinnacle of whisky
offerings." The reason in is that JW has good marketing. I answered an online survey years ago, and shortly thereafter was invited to a tasting of Johnny Walker Black. We had a couple during the cocktail hour, then sat down and did a formal tasting of some of the individual scotches that go into the blend. We were even given a small bottle to take home! Since then, they've cut back on the amount you get to drink during the event, and there is no bottle to take home. But they've also changed the tasting to include all the colors (Red, Black, Gold, Green and Blue). So while I NOW appreciate a good single malt, my first foray into the world of scotch was through the marketing efforts of Johnny Walker, and as such 'Black on the rocks' is my old standby when I go out somewhere.

[Scott R]

I loved reading part one and two of this "image" story on scotch. I feel motivated to work on imagery from reading it. I suggest an ad-campaign contest and public posting of all worthy of mention designs. Do you know of any such contests for specific brands or where to look?