When it comes to Apple products, I’m a fan. I own a MacBook Pro and an iPhone 3GS. Wouldn’t buy anything else. I depend on them like I do oxygen or water. Seriously. When it comes to Apple support…not so much. Yesterday, I was rushing out of my house to get to my car, iPhone in my left hand, earbuds (the pricey, $70 jobbers from Apple) in my ears. I started to trip, and instinctively put out my hand to steady myself. My hand connected with the earbuds. They went flying, as did my iPhone. As I picked it up, I immediately checked it for damage. Keep in mind, I’ve got the iPhone case from HELL on it – the damn thing has a silicone sleeve AND an exoskeleton made of football helmet plastic. I also have an Invisible Shield screen protector over the screen. I thought, “no worries…I’ve got an extended warranty via AppleCare, and the phone is less than a year old.” I called Apple. And then the fun began…

Turns out I didn’t really read all the fine print on the AppleCare warranty. It covers only electronic part failure. If a “wear part” goes out, or if the phone is dropped, damaged, lost or otherwise injured, you are S.O.L. Lovely. So I haven’t had the thing a year, and I’m already hosed. “So…what will you charge me for repairing it?,” I asked. I was told that Apple will sell me a reconditioned (used) 3GS for the low, low price of…wait for it…$199. Color me underwhelmed. So I said, “what are my other options?” She recommended that I Google “iPhone repair” and select a firm that will repair the screen for me. I objected, “but won’t that void my warranty?” She said, “oh, no…don’t worry about it…your warranty was voided the minute you dropped the phone.”

Pause with me for a nanosecond whilst we consider the Theatre of the Absurd my life has become.

“So you mean to tell me that I paid $69 for an additional one year warranty on my iPhone, but even though the phone is less than a year old, because I cracked the screen, not only will you NOT fix it under warranty, but you’ve also canceled the basic warranty AND the extra coverage I paid for?

Yup. That’s exactly what she was telling me.

Now, don’t get me wrong. She was unfailingly polite about everything. But her hands were tied. Which, ironically enough, was exactly what I was imagining doing to Steve Jobs, right about then.

Then…it got weirder. (Where’s Hunter S. Thompson when you need him?)

She said, “Oh…I don’t even see your AppleCare warranty on your account. Are you sure you purchased one?” I told her, yes, I had, and I even have the original box with the serial number on it in front of me.

“Okay, well you’d better give me that number, so I can record it.”

“Why?”

“Well, so we’ll have a record of your AppleCare coverage.”

“Um…that would be the AppleCare warranty coverage that you told me is now null and void because my screen is cracked? THAT AppleCare coverage?”

“Well…yes. I suppose so.”

I thought for a minute. “Well, what if I DON’T register the plan? I mean, it won’t do me any good now, right? And then in June, when you guys release whatever iPhone hotness takes the place of the 3GS in the hearts and minds of MacFanboys everywhere, I could just shell out the big bucks for the new phone, and the apply the AppleCare plan to the NEW phone where it might – just might – do me some good. Right?”

She found my logic to be unassailable.

So I looked up “iPhone Repair” on Google. Turns out there are some anecdotal stories about how some poor schmucks have taken their iPhones to Apple stores and found Geniuses that took pity upon them, repairing them gratis. Hope springs eternal. So tomorrow, I’m heading for Big D and my nearest Apple Emporium to try my luck. If I bomb out there, I’ll try one of the several Dallas-based repair depots, and see if I can get my iPhone back to looking healthy.

So, Steve…if you’re listening, do me a favor. Stop selling AppleCare. That kind of thing is beneath you. It’s poorly marketed, misrepresented, and not worth the money – all things that run diametrically opposed to the “Apple Way.” And if a racket is what you’re after, go for where the REAL money is. Insurance. I hear it’s a license to steal.

Denny’s Restaurants has been around for…well…for a long time. Long as I can remember, anyway. And they’ve been largely interchangeable, between their competition. I mean, can you really tell me how Denny’s differs from iHOP, Shoneys, or any of the other places that cater to big appetites with small wallets? I can’t. But Denny’s may have found a way to cut through the clutter and make a name for themselves. And it involves, of all things, television.

Television…it’s sooooo 90′s. Or 80′s. Lord knows, it’s not “now,” or “hip” or “happening.” The flavor of the month for that would be Twitter, or one of the other social networking phenoms. So it’s unusual in this day and age to see an established but sleepy brand do something that can rise above the video noise and come up with a campaign that is, well…blogworthy. But Denny’s did it.

Their new commercial features a Joe Average guy who looks like he’s not afraid to get his hands dirty for a living, coincidentally somebody that actually enjoys eating enough food to qualify as not only breakfast, but ballast. He has that same sort of no-nonsense, matter-of-fact delivery that marks him as a stereotypical “solid Midwestern” type. Think Patrick “Puddy” Warburton, without the fame.

What gets your attention, though, is some of the best writing I’ve seen in a commercial since Bartles & Jaymes started the wine cooler craze. They’ve created a character that at once comes off as both endearingly earnest and charmingly a little thick. He opines about frappaccinos and mochaccinos as foodstuffs not fit for a decent breakfast.

Denny’s has correctly identified their competition for the breakfast market not restaurants like iHOP, but coffee shops like Starbucks. You see, by going after the coffee crowd, they can increase their market share for breakfasts by acquiring new customers, rather than fighting their fellow restaurants for the same bunch that already brunches. They establish this proposition with a memorable one-liner, “Coffee and milk foam is NOT a meal!” But it gets better. The payoff at the end of the spot is the best one-liner that ranks right up there with Bartles & Jaymes best:

“Mr. Chino, I’m not a fan of your beverages, but I sure do love your pants.”

With the kind of responses they are getting from the public, I’d be surprised if the Denny’s guy doesn’t join spokesmodels like my personal fave, the Glade Lady, in a long-running series of spots. I’d also be surprised if Denny’s market share and in-store sales doesn’t go through the roof.

No thanks to Mr. Chino, and his beverage empire.

When it comes to corporate disasters, the problems with Toyota’s gas pedals is a doozy. From a PR perspective, this one ranks right up there with Union Carbide (Bhopal), Johnson and Johnson (Tylenol), and of course Ford/Firestone (Explorer). Which makes it all the more curious as to how Toyota seems to be dragging their feet in their response to the problem.

I’ve done some writing for TheTruthAboutCars.com (an excellent site if you’re interested in…well…the TRUTH about cars), and I’ve been monitoring their take on the Pedalgate thing. As usual TTAC goes beyond the hype and headlines, and investigates what’s REALLY going on. Seems that Toyota uses two designs for their pedals, from two manufacturers. To be fair, Toyota designs them, then farms out the manufacture to contractors. But what’s ironic is that one design (made of plastic) is trouble-free, and the other (metal) one is fraught with problems. Even more interesting is that there’s plenty of evidence that these problems date back to 2007 or 2008, and that Toyota has known about the problems since they began.

There are two questions here. The obvious one is “What did Toyota know, and when did they know it?” The less obvious one (to non-marketing types) is “Why isn’t Toyota being pro-active in their response to this problem?” So far, Toyota’s response has been positively tone-deaf. After an initial, aggressive move to stop production/sales of affected models, Toyota’s made one wrong-headed move after the next.

If Toyota wants to either turn lemons into lemonade – or at this point, at least do no (further) harm to their rep, they need to meet this thing head-on. For instance, stop screwing around with trying to repair or modify the pedal design that doesn’t work, and just replace all the existing faulty designs with the model that’s trouble-free. Next, they need to mount an aggressive PR campaign to explain what they are doing, and why they are doing it. A forensic examination of their design processes wouldn’t hurt either. And finally, they need to look at what they can do to keep current customers from becoming former customers. Maybe free scheduled-maintenance for the next three years, if done at a Toyota dealership. Or a gas card. Something. Something that says “we’re sorry we screwed up, and value our customers more than our bottom line.”

Will Toyota get it? I’m frankly not sure. Given their rep for savvy marketing, I never thought any problem like this would have gotten this far down the path of cluelessness. But it has. And as the de facto industry leader, the way they ultimately deal with this problem will cast a long shadow over the automobile biz as a whole. Toyota…the next move is yours.

====================

Addendum: Just after I posted this blog entry, Obama’s Secretary of Transportation claimed that he’d “misspoken” earlier in the day, when he advised Toyota owners of affected vehicles to NOT drive them, but demand repairs from their dealers. Nice to know that the Obama Administration’s responses to a national crisis is consistently ambivalent.

I’m also told that the new rules on blogging mean I need to disclose any connections I might have to Toyota. I have none, unless you count owning a RAV4 back around 1996 for all of about 6 months, and dating someone who drives a Camry. I own no stock in Toyota – or any other automobile company for that matter – and I am not a compensated spokesman for any company with any connection to Toyota. So there.

Pepsi Throwback: An idea who's time has come...and gone.

I admit it. I love colas. Far more than I should. In fact, when I wanna lose weight (which is most of the time), I swear off them (or swear at them), as it’s a great way to eliminate empty calories from my diet. But oh, what I lose when I do so…that rush I get with the morning’s first intake of caffeine! The bite of the cola as it trickles across my palette. The joy of cola, indeed.

But since I was a kid, colas – virtually ANY colas – have become a mere shadow of themselves, thanks to bottlers’ ever-changing formulas designed to save a buck. I speak of the vile change from the traditional pure cane sugar to the concoction known as “high-fructose corn syrup,” A.K.A.: “HFCS.” If you have a can or bottle of your carbonated sugar water beverage of choice at hand, feel free to take a gander at the ingredients. I’ll wait…

…Back? Good. Did you notice the absence of “real” sugar and the substitution of high-fructose corn syrup in the ingredients list? Yep. Unless you’re drinking something from South o’ the border or a product of a micro-bottler (i.e.: Jones Soda), you’re getting the UNreal thing, regardless of brand. Bottlers made the big switcheroo years ago to save over the escalating price of cane sugar. That switch came with a steep price – first of all, the bite of cane sugar is not in any way replicated in corn sugar. Second, there are some fairly well-documented health concerns regarding HFCS in foods.

Now I’m not a doctor, research scientist, or some kind of eco-Nazi, on the warpath against “Frankenfoods.” I’m sure the folks over at the High-fructose Corn Syrup lobby are not bad people (call off the dogs, guys!) and their product is not the spawn of Satan, as some would have you believe. But I have a hard time swallowing (no pun intended) their argument that because corn is all-natural, that HFCS is every bit as natural, and therefore harmless.

You see, there have been some links noted between HFCS and increased cases of diabetes. Is this true? No idea. Should we ban HFCS without proof? Of course not. Should we study this more and not let a lobbyist group throw up a big smokescreen campaign to divert our attention from what could be a real health issue? Undoubtedly.

But I’m not here today to argue about the relative merits of HFCS and links to diabetes. I’m here to rag on Pepsi for a really stupid marketing idea.

Soda Cognoscenti the world over will tell you (and tell you, and tell you) that cane sugar makes for a vastly superior pour over beet sugar or corn sugar. End of discussion. They’ll also decry the day that bottlers made the switch, and claim they’d be happy to pay the extra coin to get that cane sugar rush back. And Pepsi has (temporarily) obliged, with the release of their “Throwback” line of beverages featuring REAL corn sugar.

I mean, if the Throwback cans contain (by their own admission, remember) “real” sugar, what in the Sam Hill have they been putting in the OTHER cans of Pepsi? That would be the aforementioned HFCS – one of those slightly mysterious ingredients you see in processed foods, like MSG or something else with an unpronounceable name that only a lab rat could love.

So if I’m a cane sugar fan, why do I object to this campaign?

Simple. It’s every bit as stupid and damning to their core product line as “Budweiser Select” is to Bud. You see, what Pepsi is acknowledging here is that their drinks used to taste better. A LOT better. And if you buy their “Throwback” Pepsis, Mountain Dews, et all, you’ll taste what I mean. There is an entire (Pepsi) generation of kids that have never had the oral pleasure of downing a cane sugar drink. What’s to be gained here for Pepsi?

Now I know that PepsiCo is King of the Line Extensions. They’ve never met a brand they couldn’t weaken by extending it one more direction. Pepsi. Diet Pepsi. Pepsi One. Pepsi Clear (you get the picture…not that Coca Cola is any better in this regard). So the Throwback line is completely in character for Pepsi. But I don’t get what they are trying to accomplish. It’s not being marketed as a premium pour. The ad campaign is hammering on the nostalgia theme. Huh? I mean, they are admitting (on the one hand) that the old-ways is the best-ways, and on the other, not doing a thing to try and protect their core products. Self-cannibalization is STILL cannibalization, after all. And what if demand is such that they are forced to either keep the Throwback line around, or end up going back to cane sugar all together? Unless sugarcane prices have plunged recently, I doubt that it’s cheaper than corn syrup, and I suspect the corn syrup lobby will NOT go quietly into that good night, especially as the Ethanol thing hasn’t quite worked out according to their master plan for energy domination.

What is Pepsi’s game plan here? (Artificially) Color me “mystified.” While I vastly prefer cane sugar over corn (not to mention Coke over Pepsi – sorry, guys), I just don’t get it. And this is coming from a guy who willingly pays over a buck per king-sized bottle for “Mexican Coca-Cola,” made with REAL cane sugar. (I figure they taste better, and the additional cost keeps me from downing more than one per day.)

If anybody can shed light on Pepsi’s end-game, I’d be fascinated to hear about it. Without some inside knowledge, I’m afraid that their “Throwback” campaign is going to do little more than “Throw Away” their level playing field with their competitors, at a premium price for cane sugar. On the other hand, if this somehow results in Pepsi, Coke, et all, returning to their sugarcane roots, I’ve but one thing to say about it.

Sweet!

Starbucks began life as a small chain of coffee shops founded on the principle that consumers would pay extra for a better cup of coffee. As it turns out, a LOT more. It worked. The company created an experiential mystique that enabled them to justify paying outrageous amounts of money for a cuppa joe. (This is a quantitatively provable, as blind taste tests have repeatedly shown that grocery store Folgers beats Starbucks coffee on taste. It’s the perception that Starbucks java is better that let’s them charge out the wazoo.) As a way to keep buns in seats, Starbucks began offering WiFi access. After some experimentation, Starbucks settled on a WiFi provider, and a standardized pricing structure. Another effort to make Starbucks Uber Alles was to put cafes in other retailers, such as Barnes & Noble Booksellers locations. It’s a nice fit – books and coffee. Recently, Starbucks and B&N announced a new policy, offering WiFi access at no charge within every B&N location.

In Shreveport, there’s a Barnes & Noble almost directly across the street (Youree Drive) from a freestanding Starbucks store. You can argue that the ambience is different at the two stores – the freestanding store has a few stuffed chairs, while you have to walk out of the Starbucks and into the B&N store area in order to find a comfortable chair. And of course, the B&N Starbucks has a virtually limitless supply of books and magazines. And free WiFi.

I learned of the WiFi policy disconnect today, when I took my dad to the freestanding Starbucks in search of some java and a change of scenery. It was then that I learned that WiFi access is not free at Starbucks. Well…not at that Starbucks. The one directly across the street has all the free WiFi you can eat, and books to boot.

The net effect is that the freestanding Starbucks has lost a customer, for I value the ability to get online as much as I treasure my beverage du jour. If I can get one for free, I’m gonna beat a path to their door, leaving the freestanding Starbucks one or two customers the poorer. The whole experience makes me wonder, just how long it will take Starbucks to realize how many customers they are alienating by charging for something in Store A, that they are willing to give away in Store B.

Let me tell you why this is wrong…on so many levels.

First of all, if I take my date to Chez Overpriced Dinners or Casa de Dinero, I’m expecting a great meal – especially if I’m paying a lot of dough for it. If I’m enjoying the meal and discover that the food I’m eating is actually some cheap stuff from Pizza Hut (that I can have delivered to my home) I’ve just lost all respect for the restaurant in question. I mean, why would I go spend money at a place that’s gonna sell me stuff I can get a lot cheaper at home? Take away the “let’s get out of the house” angle, and you’ve got…nuthin’.

Second, you’re essentially telling the world, “Pizza Hut products are just as good as restaurant-quality food.” Nobody’s REALLY gonna believe that – especially if they’ve tasted the Pizza Hut product. But it is going to make people stop and compare the two – and Pizza Hut will lose that comparision.

Third, it’s a mean-spirited idea. I can’t believe anybody’s gonna be delighted to learn that they’ve been fooled by a restaurant and by Pizza Hut. Kinda leaves a bad taste in my mouth, no pun intended.

Fourth, I’m really fed up (again, no pun intended…I’m just hungry), with businesses that are dissatisfied with their core biz, and decide to branch out. That’s not expanding a franchise, people. It’s called losing focus. If you’re Pizza Hut, sell pizza. Not pasta. Not hot wings. Pizza. Do that better than anybody else, and the world will beat a path to your door. Do it the way you’ve been doing it, and you’ll be wondering where your market dominance has gone. (Hint: to your competition.)

Marketing can’t make a bad idea good. It can’t make illogical things logical. Pizza Hut is guilty of trying to do both, in the first degree.

Fast-forward to 2009. HillaryCare is back, retooled as “ObamaCare” – but this time, it was crafted in the House of Representatives, instead of the White House. Harry and Louise are back, too. This time, they are FOR the plan, courtesy of their new sponsors, a pharmaceutical industry trade group and Families USA, is a progressive non-profit consumer health-care advocacy group.

Harry and Louise sold out.

The new spot is confusing, simply because these two went from being government watchdogs to government lapdogs in under 30 seconds. I had to watch the spot several times because it’s so bloody oblique. As I listened again, I realized why I was confused – because they were mindlessly shilling for Obama & Company. So what made them fight HillaryCare, but love ObamaCare? Simply put, their corporate masters got bought out.

Unlike last time, when Hillary thought that she and her progressive pals would be able to run roughshod over all the stakeholders, Obama thought that by buying off Big Pharma, AARP, and the AMA, they could overcome the two groups scheduled for a-screwin’ in the new plan: Insurance companies and the general public. Lo and behold, the public – in particular, senior citizens – have pushed back, and have basically said “NO” to ObamaCare. Interestingly, Harry and Louise’s former team – Big Insurance, is now getting pilloried by Pelosi & Co.  (as a writer, I’m dying to write “pilloried by Hillary” for the alliteration alone, but Ms. Clinton is busy saving the world from the evils of the U.S.A., and has to watch her pet project from the sidelines).

What interests me as a marketer is how minor political icons have, through a quirk of ownership (the IP is owned by the agency – not the client), changed sides, and what effect that will have on the debate. I’m betting that the switch will backfire, and that Harry and Louise will find their credibility shot, and their 15 minutes of fame a fond memory. But that’s what happens when you trade consistency for expediency and common sense for a quick buck.

I feel that way about Spam. There’s few things I can think of that bother me more than unsolicited intrusions into my online activities. What’s worse, is I’m now dealing with some Spammer that thinks it’s acceptable to hack into this blog and insert code so he can pump Spam to my readers.

I hate Spam. But I hate Spammers – and hackers – even more.

I can tell you it’s not been a problem for any of you – because this clueless hack is such a moron, he apparently doesn’t know how to properly hack a blog – his code simply makes my blog disappear. No code. Just a blank page. Mind you, I still don’t know how the little bastard is getting in…I’ve taken all the precautions I know, and I’m still getting several pages changed without permission.

I can promise you, though, that my patience is wearing thin. And I have a buddy who has a buddy that does high-level contract work for the code spooks at the NSA. I may call in a favor. Or three. And then we’ll see how much this little twerp likes it when HIS computer gets hacked.