When Small Doesn't Mean Small

I just finished reading a recap about the Ad Age Small Agency Conference held in New Orleans recently. One of the discussions that permeated the conference was “how to replace the term small.” Everyone seemed in agreement that the word small gave the connotation that the agency did not have the ability to provide the client with all the services needed to do a first class job of communication. In some cases this might be true, but in many cases, the “small” agency is faster, more creative, more affordable, and just as darn good as the mega-agencies at providing services for clients.

Imagery is small. We are also what we term “virtual.” We don’t have fancy offices that increase our overhead. We can provide all the marketing services needed by clients – research, strategic planning, all the advertising and public relations services including creative and media, web and social media services, and a few other things that our larger competitors don’t touch, like custom training programs, meeting facilitation and custom secret shopper programs. The client has access to what she or he needs, when she or he needs it, without having to pay for the overhead of "all those people under the same roof."

How can we do it? We have a network of exceptional professionals that we bring in when the client needs the services.

Are we free? No. Are we cheap? No. We’re cost effective. Let’s face it, folks, no one gives her time and talent away. Do we get results? Yes. And we have clients that will tell you that.

Our clients are small to medium sized businesses and non-profits. The small business and non-profit clients used to think they couldn't afford an agency. We convinced them that they could and been partners in their growth.

We might be small in numbers "under the same roof," but we’re mighty in creativity, experience, skills, and abilities, and we know how to get the job done excellently. Small can be a good thing, even in the agency business.

AT&T and Verizon are Wising Up!

In the email news I received today from Advertising Age, the online publication reports that AT&T is dropping its whiny response to Verizon's "apps and maps" campaign for a more positive campaign concept. I'm not sure what "Rethink Possible" means, but at least AT&T seems to have gotten the message that spitting contests don't do much for the average consumer.

The article also says that Verizon is expected to shift gears to a more positive campaign message.

This is a good thing! Maybe the two communications giants will give us some solid reasons to buy their brands instead of acting like kids having a playground spat.

AT&T and Verizon: C'mon, boys! Your playground arguments are getting on teacher's nerves!

Okay. So we have "apps and maps" and we have "maps and slaps." Can anyone tell me why we should believe either of these two companies' advertising arguments?

I looked at the two maps that Verizon uses in its advertising and had to laugh. From just looking at the coverage comparison, I really doubted the truth of the commercial! It was just a bit too far fetched to think that AT& T had that many holes in its coverage. I'm an AT&T user and I call all over the United States and get calls from all over the United States. Yes, there are areas where call strength might not be the best, but I've also talked to Verizon customers who have the same problem.

And AT&T, just because I'm your customer doesn't mean I like your pouty little comeback to Verizon's maps. Your commercials and spokesperson sound like a whiney baby. And I dislike whiney babies in business!

In fact, I don't like either company's advertising strategy! I like the "Now Network" strategy that Sprint is using. Sprint isn't talking bad about the competition. They are talking good about themselves, and throwing in a little humor to grab my attention.

I thought the objective of advertising was to tout the benefits of your product to the consumer, not give your competition face time on your dime. Especially the mean way these two companies are going at it. The commercials aren't even funny! And the differentiation of any wireless brand is questionable these days. The only difference I can see is customer service, and I'm convinced AT&T still has the best. That's the reason I'm sticking with them.

Progresso abandoned its attacks on Campbell's in favor of its current ad strategy, the "string-and-can phone inquiries" which are extremely humorous, get my attention and promote the benefits of the Progresso brand and products. I've actually started buying some Progresso soups, which is a big change since I've always been a "Campbell's soup kid."

So AT&T and Verizon, stop acting like children and tell me what's great about your product in an interesting way!