So, you’ve decided to begin a new market research project.  You’ve got your email database that you’ll send the questions to and you’ve opened up your market research provider’s survey builder to create the survey.  You may have done it dozens of times before; that is, begun a research project knowing that what you’ll get back is a group of conclusions about your group and segments of your group, which may be by any combination of demographic criteria.

When you’re done with the research and analysis, you’ll have a team meeting, report on the results and maybe test a few changes in your marketing or sales plan.  Sorry, that’s not good enough.

Here’s a test to see if you’re getting your money’s worth:

1. Does your research platform automatically append every response to the respondent’s email in your database?
2. Can you convert zips to cities, states, regions, or countries with one click?
3. Does it enable you to ask and analyze responses to open-ended questions, without limit?
4. Can you see all the language that was used by respondents to open-ended questions by simply clicking on a word?
5. Can you convert words into phrases and segment your database based on emotions, frustrations or perceptions?
6. Can you convert word clouds into bar charts with one click?
   
7. Can you create a lexicon of common words or phrases that your database uses?
8. Can you send your questions out to any number of people, 10,000, 100,000, 1 million without an upcharge?
9. Can you ask the same database some questions tomorrow and then ask a different set of questions next month without an additional charge?
10. Can you create and analyze segments based on any combination of closed- or open-ended responses?
11. Can you save segments and know that they’ll automatically build as you add new people to your database?
12. Can you create a segment to ask clarifying questions or send them an email tailored to their frustrations, needs or opinions, all within the same platform?

If your answer is “no” to any of the above, you’re not getting your money’s worth. Take a look at Oomiji because this platform was built to do all of the above.  Oomiji is an end-to-end solution that enables you to build your customer database, query them with research, which can be closed- or open-ended, segment them by any criteria and respond to them any way you want.  One Oomiji client made this observation, “If database acquisition, market research, CRM and email marketing had a baby, its name would be Oomiji.”

In its full application, Oomiji is a customer engagement tool because it enables you to learn what your customers are thinking, acknowledge their comments and then respond to them based on what they’ve told you.  If you think about it, that’s just how we build relationships when talking to each other 1:1.  It makes sense and while you’re at it, you get a pretty amazing research tool that gives you more than your money’s worth.

You can learn more about Oomiji at oomiji.com or watch an intro video here.

Tags: Analysis, Append Data, Corporate Myopia, CRM, Customer engagement, Customers, Database, Demographics, email marketing, end-to-end solution, lexicon, market research, Marketing, Oomiji, Open-ended questions, Outcomes, Respondents, segment, segmentation

It’s hard to estimate the damage done to United Airline’s brand from yesterday’s “incident” on one of its flights from Chicago.  (I’m tempted to describe it in more Draconian terms but there’s more than enough social media for that.)  First, there’s the proliferation of the multiple videos that have now been seen by tens of millions of Americans.  Second, that the man so violently ejected was Chinese has created a whirlwind of social media among many millions in China.  (Anyone for a flight from Beijing to LA?  I hear there are seats available.)  Finally, for today at least, is the tone-deaf response of United’s CEO, Oscar Munoz in which his use of the non-word, “re-accommodate” is getting its own share of Internet derisiveness.  Wow!  What a mess!

If you think this will all pass, consider this:  Today’s drop in United stock has already cost the airline about $600 million.  What a waste of brand equity!  So, let’s assume Mr. Munoz calls you up and asks, “What should we do?”  We can expect the usual mea culpas, compensations to people on that flight and perhaps some people will lose their jobs.  But that won’t stem the long-term damage so here’s a proactive plan to retrieve that lost brand equity.

1. Send an email to all your customers worldwide. Apologize, but do more than that.  Ask them to answer a few questions that will help you ensure not only that this never takes place again but show United how it can improve its service to all its customers.  As to what questions should be asked, here are a few:

•  How did hearing about or viewing the incident make you feel?

•  How do you think an overbooked situation should be handled?

•  What is the most frustrating thing about flying from purchasing tickets to arriving at your destination?

•  How has this incident effected your willingness to recommend United to others?

Just those four questions – that’s all you need to ask.  They’re all that anybody cares about so don’t muck it up with marketing speak or other meaningless questions.

They are open-ended questions and they should remain that way because people will see that you really are interested in their opinions.  Yes, responses to open-ended questions can be difficult to analyze but don’t worry we have a solution (albeit self-serving) for you there.

2. Send every person who answers those questions a thank-you email.

3. Analyze the responses and create needs-based segmentations from the feelings and frustrations that are expressed. While you’re at it, create a lexicon of words that respondents used.  (Here’s the self-serving part.)  Oomiji can do all that.

4. Create a separate response for each major segment. Compose an email of what you heard, what you learned and that you’ll respond to them again in a few weeks with all the changes you’ll make.  (Oomiji can do that for you too because we append every single sentence to their email address.)

5. Make some real changes that help solve all the problems you learned about. By asking open-ended questions, you’ll hear some things you didn’t expect.  We’ve found that’s true for every client we’ve ever worked for.

6. Write the respondents again and let them know the changes you’re making. Send each segment all the changes but put the ones most meaningful to them at the top.

7. In a couple of months, ask them if they’ve seen any changes and their responses. Thank them again.  You might even reward them because ultimately, it’s the answer to the last question above about their willingness to recommend United that counts.

8. Repeat this process regularly and make sure you dispense with corporate speak and open yourselves up to active listening, acknowledging and responding. That’s the Oomiji pattern and it works.

Will this get United’s $600 million back?  We believe it will and they’ll reap the bonus of creating a better airline at the same time.

You can learn more about Oomiji at oomiji.com or watch our intro video here.

Tags: Americans, Assumptions, brand equity, Corporate Myopia, Customers, dragging passenger, Leadership, Marketing, Mistakes, Oomiji, open-ended research, Oscar Munoz, Outcomes, Situation Analysis, Social Media, U.S. Marketplace, United Airlines, United CEO

It’s been some time since I’ve written on this blog.  That’s because I’ve started a new one at my new company, Oomiji.  Check it out at oomiji.com.  I’ll repost many of the blog posts from Oomiji here but some will also appear here that you won’t find on Oomiji, such as my upcoming holiday cartoon (a monumental challenge this year).

I’ve been thinking a lot about this Carl Sagan quote lately as I’ve watched several well-conceived businesses fall by the wayside, others make what may become terminal errors and, our recent election.  Thousands of small businesses decline or fail every year.  In just the past five years, AT&T, Alcoa, Bank of America, Hewlett Packard, and Kraft Foods have all fallen from the Dow 30.  And, of course, the can’t-lose, first-woman president who would ride to victory on a female, Hispanic, black, college-educated coalition didn’t.

Just the other day, Warren Buffet was quoted as saying about Wells Fargo, “Cultures shift.  You can turn it for the better or worse by your own actions.”  About the election, I’ve heard that Hillary Clinton lost because of racism, sexism, anti-intellectualism and as many other “-isms” that you could name.  To all of those, I say, “No, it’s more basic than that.  She simply didn’t listen.”  She didn’t listen to the shifting cultures all around her, not only to those who worked against her but to those who voted for her or supported her but weren’t motivated enough to come out and vote.

In an earlier iteration of Oomiji in 2004, we were asked by the Howard Dean presidential campaign to give them some insights on why his Internet fund raising was drying up.  His was the first campaign to raise massive amounts of money in small gifts over the Internet.  The answer was pretty simple then too.  Supporters told us that all Dean’s campaign did was ask for money, again and again.  They never asked for opinions from the people who gave.  Politics teaches some good lessons about business because much it is laid bare before the public.

There are a lot of ways to listen to your customers and constituencies.  We built Oomiji as both a listening and segmentation tool, so you can converse with people, divide them into segments and send targeted communications that are tailored to their needs, perceptions or frustrations.  It’s a way of monitoring and understanding how cultures are shifting and how to address people who are caught at any point in the shift.

You can participate in an example of how Oomiji works by taking our short survey on Customer Engagement, two words that get bandied about by people who may not fully recognize their implications.  If you take the survey, we’ll send you a summary of what people said and that way, we can all listen to see if we detect some helpful insights into our own businesses.

The oft quoted admonition, “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate,” was told to Paul Newman in the mulit-Oscar nominated Cool Hand Luke back in 1967.  Yet, despite nearly 50 years that have passed, communication is still our greatest failure.

Tags: Carl Sagan, Communication, Corporate Myopia, Culture, Customer engagement, Customers, Democrats and business, Leadership, Mistakes, Outcomes, Politicians, Republicans, Warren Buffet, Winning

If you’ve received my cards in past years, you know that I have an avocation as part of a cartoon team along with my good friend, George Hughes. Every year, we produce a topical cartoon. This year was filled with dominant personalities but really, nobody could be as great, smart, talented or loved as Santa. I hope you enjoy it and have a Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Joyous Kwanza and a Happy New Year!

As in past years, the card is from our side business, Gigundo Industries Incorporated, the world’s largest non-existent, virtual company, although like others of its type, it has a website and if your thirst for cartoons isn’t quenched, you can follow the crass commercial message at the bottom of the card and see more of our work at www.gigundoindustries.com.

Happy Holidays,
Jon

After starting a war that has become a plague, which will likely last decades, and leaving the economy in shambles, I never thought I would feel complimentary toward President George W. Bush. But watch this CNN interview with Jeb Bush and see if you agree.

In the interview with Jeb Bush, he says 5 or 6 times that “we need a strategy to deal with Islamic terrorism.”

When asked what the strategy should be, he lists a bunch of tactics including enforce a no-fly zone, give aid to the Assad opposition, etc. He never suggests a strategy.

The interviewer eventually shows a speech by former Governor George W. Bush in which he says, “The face of terrorism is not the true face of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don’t represent peace. They represent evil and war.”

Therein lies a strategy. If you can position terrorists as not being Islam and acknowledge Islam as one of the world’s great religions, you can (1) put terrorists on the defensive in their cultural and social campaign; (2) rally the Islam world in showing support for their religion; (3) stand more chance of gaining support from Islamic political and religious leaders that we all need to fight against terrorism.

President Bush’s problem was that he chose the wrong tactics to pursue the strategy and that brought disastrous consequences. You can’t say you’re one thing and then, go out and act like another.  When he got his MBA, he must have passed the strategy course and flunked the one on implementation.

The next question to Governor Jeb Bush after showing his brother’s statements was “Is Islam peace, Governor?”

To which he responds, “You know what? I know what Islamic terrorism is and that’s what we are fighting in ISIS, Al Qaeda and all the other groups and that’s what our focus should be on.”

In this response, he first equates Islam with terrorism, which, if a strategy, is self-defeating as there are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world. That’s almost one-quarter of the world’s population. If you’re going to go out of your way to offend a religion, pick the Wiccans. I don’t know what they believe but they’re only 134,000 of them. (That’s up from 8,000 in 1990 so maybe we should be looking into their affairs.)

I think the lesson here is that if you’re going to run for President, don’t assume everyone you’re talking to is an idiot. Some of us understand that tactics without strategy is like running in circles. You might make a lot of noise, but you’ll never reach your objective.

Tags: Al Qaeda, Assumptions, CNN, George W. Bush, ISIS, Islam, Jeb Bush, Leadership, MBA, Media, Muslims, no-fly zone, Outcomes, Politicians, Republicans, Situation Analysis, Strategy, Tactics, Terrorism, Winning

Opponents of the Iran nuclear deal say it’s a bad deal because Iran cannot be trusted and will violate the agreement. Okay, I’ll take the bait. Let’s agree that will be the case. Now, here are two scenarios:

Scenario 1: No deal

Congress rejects the deal and has enough votes to overturn the President’s veto. There is no deal. The Iranian leadership says this validates their belief that the U.S. cannot be trusted. They tell their nuclear scientists to go full speed ahead to develop a nuclear arsenal. They also begin a massive domestic media campaign to convince the more liberal populace that the U.S. truly is evil. It makes sense as Iranian liberals’ hopes are quashed. There will be no change, only more repression.

The Russians react by saying the U.S. cannot be trusted, Obama does not speak for America, only a reactionary Congress and that the U.S. is simply a surrogate for Netanyahu. Defiantly, Putin announces that Russia is going to reopen trade of all types including weaponry with Iran. China is less vocal but announces that trade with Iran will resume and that American presidents cannot be trusted.

Germany is stunned by the American rejection and Merkel announces that it has become clear that Germany has to go its own way and as the leader of Europe, will take Europe along. France goes along and even a restructuring of NATO is discussed in European capitals.

The Israeli government rejoices as their hegemony over American policy in the Middle East is cemented. They begin to draw up contingency war plans with Iran with the belief that they can force America’s hand into a war to support them. The right wing Israeli and American media machines begin to beat the drum.

President Obama suffers a huge defeat in guiding American diplomacy. He loses stature abroad and is crippled domestically. He gets sympathy only from the British. Neither the Germans nor the French want to entertain any proposals from the U.S. and reject the idea of new sanctions. They plan to try to negotiate their own trade deals with Iran and leave the U.S. out in the cold. Republicans celebrate Obama’s defeat as the victory they have been working on his entire presidency. Boehner and McConnell announce that the deal’s rejection is a display of American strength and that Congress will guide the country in the presence of a feckless president. They make a lot of noise about negotiating a better deal but can’t find international support.

Scenario 2: The deal stands

Congress approves the deal (not likely) or more likely, it fails to override the president’s veto. The deal goes into effect although the Iranian government expresses concerns that Congress is not behind the president. They go along, however, as they believe, as many in the Middle East do, that strong leaders rule countries.

The Russians and Chinese, while skeptical, acquiesce and resume trade with Iran based on the parameters of the deal. The Germans, French and British do the same and along with the U.S. actively develop the structure for monitoring, inspection as well as activities to try to normalize relations with Iran.

Obama wins international acclaim and is said to finally deserve his Nobel Peace Prize. The other negotiating powers concede that his administration held firm and delivered on the deal they all agreed to. They seek other areas for continued international cooperation.

While the U.S. wins respect abroad, Republicans, Netanyahu and Fox TV go into 24/7/365 PR war. (Is that any different from what they’re doing now?) Nonetheless, Netanyahu suffers a defeat and vote of no confidence in the Knesset. He calls for new elections to take place as he proclaims this as the path to Israel’s destruction. He gains support from right wing American Jews, Republicans and Fox News. They all call Obama and Kerry worse names than before and provoke the Republican candidates for president to have massive tantrums. The mainstream media loves it. Life goes on.

But let’s bring in two alternative scenarios to this:

First, let’s assume Iran and everyone else abides by the agreement.

Not much to say about this. Iran slowly moderates as its populace discovers consumerism and enjoys cheaper cell phones, blue jeans and motorbikes. Israel periodically beats war drums but does nothing unless attacked first. Iran becomes a richer country and has more international clout, sometimes to the advantage of the U.S and sometimes to our detriment. Pretty much the way the world works now.

Second, let’s assume Iran violates the deal.

We catch them red handed a few years into the deal. Unfortunately, we catch them late, just as Israel and the deal’s opponents thought we would and they’re much farther along in developing dooms day weaponry. Now, what do we have? The Iranian economy has rebounded. They’ve become a stronger country in the region AND they’ve developed nuclear weapons. Now five major countries are embarrassed. They’ve cooperated, pushed and tugged at each other until they could come to a deal with an adversary. They’ve built up trade and now this. By the terms of the agreement, the sanctions go back into place immediately. The U.S. will argue forcefully that the sanctions must be even tougher than before, and if Iran becomes belligerent, we may have to impose an air and sea blockade. How much clout will the U.S. have if this happens? More because our government followed through with the agreement? Or less because we rejected the deal and no deal ever took place?

It’s really quite simple and the argument is much more eloquently made by Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune in his editorial of August 12^th, “What if Iran Cheats?”

But what I think is at the core of the deal’s opponents is fear. Fear has been stoked by the American right wing, AIPAC, Fox News and Netanyahu’s government. Decisions made out of fear have never been successful. Obama has been compared to Neville Chamberlain’s cave to Hitler but that actually was a decision made out of Chamberlain’s fear that the Nazis couldn’t be stopped. Churchill’s stubbornness in the face of war, Roosevelt’s decision to go into war were made out of the security that we needed to stop foreign aggression, not kneel before it. And if you think the Iranians are being foreign aggressors, ask yourself who has gone to war in the Middle East before, not through surrogates of tribal terrorists but directly with troops and warplanes and cruise missiles. After you do that, look at the American flag and ask yourself what are you afraid of?

Tags: AIPAC, American flag, Boehner, British, Chamberlain, Chicago Tribune, China, Churchill, Congress, Corporate Myopia, Europe, Fox, France, Germany, Iran, Israel, Jews, McConnell, Merkel, Middle East, NATO, Nazis, Netanyahu, Nobel Peace Prize, nuclear deal, President Obama, Putin, Roosevelt, Russians, sanctions, Steve Chapman, trust, UK, veto

There are many reasons companies lose customers but, in the end, they all come down to a lack of customer engagement or advocacy. When engagement drops to a point where customers begin saying this company makes their lives difficult rather than easy, it’s only a matter of time until they go elsewhere. The difficult part for managers hoping to stop the flow is that customer loss is usually a trickle and rarely a cascade. It can be difficult to detect and harder to understand the problem or how to fix it. This is particularly true for consumer facing B2C businesses.  B2B companies usually have client managers whose job is to stay on top of things, but the same rules apply and results can take place.

It’s true that general inertia can keep dissatisfied customers patronizing companies they dislike for a long time. It can often seem too difficult or time-consuming to change your service supplier. The hurdles presented in front of change require time to find a new supplier and leave your old one. But inertia only forestalls the loss. It never prevents it because neglect feeds upon itself to a point where customers can feel forced to look elsewhere.

Here are a couple of personal examples: one large one preceded our supplier change and one small that validated it. In this case, the industry is banking and companies, such as banks, that are pressured by both small margins and ample regulation are particularly vulnerable.

For many years, my wife and I banked at HSBC. When we made the decision to go to HSBC, we were somewhat concerned about whether we would get lost in such a large company. It’s the 25^th largest bank in the world. But they had a branch only a few blocks away from our home and offices around the world, which could accommodate much of my work, which is outside the U.S.

The bank immediately provided financing for our home in New York and a vacation home in Maine. The branch personnel were always accommodating and all was good for a period of several years. Then, HSBC began to make changes and from an outside view, it seemed they were outsourcing many of their in-house services to cut costs. Service bureaus began to answer phone calls or deal with problems, many of which were not connected to each other. There was no single view of the customer. Decisions moved further away from the branch to be centralized by policy makers who were guided by lawyers. The bank would probably blame government regulation but part of succeeding in business is maintaining excellent customer relations regardless of what is thrown at you from the outside. The old saying, “Don’t make your problems into your customer’s problems” always holds true.

One day about five years ago, the local mortgage officer, always accommodating, called to say that we could refinance our mortgages at lower rates and reduce our monthly payments – a good example of trying to make things easier for the customer. There was some documentation, he said, but that it would be easy because he would shepherd it through. So we filled out the application, paid the documentation fees, authorized appraisals, credit reports and income checks. Then, came the bad news. We had been declined. It made no sense to our local mortgage officer. We had never missed a payment, had near perfect credit scores and growing businesses. Additionally, the bank had all our personal and business accounts, personal and business loans and investments. They owned us.

But then he said, “Let me see if I can get my managers to overrule the underwriter.” That sounded odd to me and it turned out that the bank had farmed out its underwriting to a third-party firm that specializes in credit analysis, or more correctly, they had computers that specialized in credit analysis. He called his boss and I called his bosses boss, all to no avail. I spoke to the underwriter who told me that we didn’t fit their formulas because we owned small businesses that couldn’t be counted on to continue to grow. I reminded her that the bank already had our loans so it wasn’t as if turning us down was going to do anything. She said, “I wouldn’t have approved you last time either.”

To make a long story short, we finally got the refinanced loans approved but only because we refused to let it die and kept pushing the decision up to the highest levels we could find in New York. It was painful and not only took much of our time to make our case but also that of our local loan officer, so in the end the bank’s cost to make the loan was higher and it also took time away from us to devote to other areas, maybe like making more money to satisfy the underwriter.

(Now, I should add that we’re not financial slouches and I’m not looking for sympathy. Remember, customer alienation is the point and there are millions of small business people just like us all across the country.)

For us, the experience was the coup de grace in our relationship with HSBC. We decided that we would leave them at the first opportune time. Several years later, we did after rearranging some of our finances. The irony was that as soon as we did, HSBC desperately wanted us to stay. But all of the equity that their local branch personnel had built by being so accommodating had melted away and we had crossed the line from engagement to alienation.

That’s the big example that caused them to lose us as customers and while I’m using my own examples, I’ve heard similar stories among many of our friends who also are small business people. (Years earlier when I had that conversation with the underwriter, I asked her if she would have been happier if I was a manager at Chrysler corporation making several hundred thousand dollars a year. “Of course,” she replied. And I then said, “But Chrysler went bankrupt and I might have lost my job.” The conversation simply went downhill from there.)

So, we’re now at a point where we’ve changed banks but still are unwinding things with HSBC. They still have the mortgage on our home in Maine and a checking account from which they are automatically receiving the monthly payment. However, we noticed that they’re continuing to send the monthly bill to our old address, so we called to have them change the address. Simple enough.

They wouldn’t do it unless I wrote them a letter to inform them. “But you’ve verified that I am who I say I am with six questions I answered correctly. Why won’t you take the information over the phone, or online? Why are you forcing me to sit down and write you a letter?”

The reply came from a supervisor as the first customer service person agreed with me and gave up in frustration. “I’m sorry,” he said. “We can only do what HSBC management tells us to do.”

I thought about his wording for a moment. (It pays to have had a mother who was an English teacher.) “Excuse me, you said “HSBC management”. Aren’t you HSBC management?”

“Technically, no. I’m with a third-party service bureau that has to follow the procedures given to us by HSBC. I agree with you but there is nothing I can do. You have to write a letter,” he said with an air of resignation and defeat.

So, I thanked him and ended the call and thought again about the axiom, “Don’t make your problems into your customer’s problems.” It was validation for our decision to leave and find a new bank.

How bad can things get when you alienate customers? I’m not advocating that any bank’s customers leave. That was the right decision for us. It may not be for others. However, I am advocating that companies use every opportunity to determine whether their customers are engaged or alienated and why, and if so, what can they do about it. In our CRM (customer relationship management) system world, customers have become a series of transactions that we evaluate with formulas and predict with algorithms. I would argue that the transactions are consequences of their relationships with the companies and brands they use. This makes it essential for companies to devote more resources to both monitoring and measuring those relationships, and doing what they can to improve them.

The same is true internally. Employees are the brand personified. Months into our banking change, I called to speak to an executive at our old bank who had been helpful. I got her assistant who was working on the problem and said what we wanted to do could be done, but wasn’t easy. “Why isn’t anything at that bank easy?” I asked.

“Tell me about it, “ she replied.  As the lobsterman, who lives down the road from me in Maine likes to comment, “Nuff said.”

I’d love to hear your comments or stories  about successful customer engagement or, conversely,  alienation.

Tags: banks, Corporate Myopia, CRM, Customer alienation, Customer engagement, Customer relations, Customers, HSBC, Outcomes

Wines from Spain recently interviewed me for their May/June newsletter.  The interview is copied here but can be read in its original form by clicking here.

Wines from Spain: How is the “Spanish wine category” today different from what it was, say, 10 years ago?

Jon Stamell: Over the past 10 years, Spain has become a major player in the U.S. wine market – new DO’s have been created, and both new and older DO’s have launched progressive marketing campaigns. The difference is incredible. If you went into a wine store ten years ago, you may not have seen a Spanish wine section, or it would’ve been very small. Now, there is a Spanish wine section in every store that is at least double what it was back then.

Are there certain Spanish regions or varietals that are experiencing significant growth right now? If so, which regions/ varietals? 

I helped begin the Vibrant Rioja campaign in 2005 and watched them experience incredible growth. The interesting thing about Rioja is that now that it exports over 1 million cases to the U.S., its distribution numbers have dramatically increased. With this incredible growth, I expect the export numbers to grow to 3 million cases in less time than it took to get to 1 million.  I think the new Ribera/Rueda campaign is going to have a similar effect on the regions of Ribera and Rueda.

There may be more diversity (in terms of wine) in Spain than there is in France or Italy, and as Americans continue to discover and learn about Spanish wines, demand will continue to rise.

Which regions or varietals do you think have the most potential for growth, considering the influence of the millennials on the US wine market?

Millennials look for great flavor and easy drinking, which means they need wines that are both balanced and well-structured. They’re also looking for products that are approachable, and that simultaneously set them apart from older generations. And, of course, they want all of this at a reasonable price.

Spanish wines fit that bill.  Most of the reds don’t have the tannic qualities of new Bordeaux wines, so they’re often ready to drink when purchased. They are also more affordable than most wines from Bordeaux, Burgundy, and the other “big” European regions. Similarly, the whites offer incredibly reasonably-priced alternatives to California Chardonnay and Italian Pinot Grigio. White grapes like Viura, Verdejo, Albariño and Godello are bright, fresh, food friendly, and a little more “modern.” Plus, unlike Bordeaux and California, Spain is not deeply associated with millennials’ parents’ generation.

What trends are driving the wine market this year? 

Compare a wine store or restaurant wine list today with one from just a few years ago. As more and more wine regions pop up and/or launch new marketing campaigns, the competition for well-established regions grows steeper. American wine drinkers are able to explore wines beyond the tried and true.

If they like them, they continue to buy them and that is diminishing brand and region loyalty as adventure and experimentation win increasing acceptance and become the dominant trends.  This presents a challenge for importers who want to consolidate their portfolios but still offer sufficient variety so they can both satisfy older wine drinking habits but serve new ones too.  It also is a difficult problem for retailers as they have limited shelf space with different types of consumers walking down the wine aisle.  Their decisions of deciding what is going to sell are not getting easier.  Notice that I did not mention “digital” as a trend. Yes, use of digital marketing is growing but it is a means to an end, a tactic to pursue a strategy. If you don’t have a strategy, the tool is not going to work for you. We see that too often.

Which trends or markets can Wines from Spain tap into in order to further accelerate their progress?

Money is still in the hands of aging boomers but it won’t be long before the oldest ones are senior citizens and their wine consumption declines.  Younger boomers are trying to stay young and, as a result, are increasingly influenced by their kids (Gen X and Millennials) so they’re trying food and wine that may be new to them.  Where I’m headed is that while marketing to boomers may be defensive, it’s a declining game.  Every brand needs to stay young but be authentic at the same time.

That’s a problem confronting California and French wineries, while Spain is already positioned on the younger end of the scale even though it’s steeped in history and tradition.  Spain shouldn’t take young wine drinkers for granted and should stay close to their interests, needs and motivations as they grow older.

What are some of the biggest challenges facing Wines from Spain?

Funding, consistency and commitment are the three biggest challenges.  Money for marketing campaigns is always a challenge and that requires acceptance that marketing is an investment, not a cost.  That can be difficult for countries where sales have not been traditionally linked to marketing. It has been proven time and again but there’s still resistance to that idea.  Rioja is an obvious example for Spain but also look at the example of Glen Ellen in the 1990’s and Yellowtail in the 2000’s.  Neither had vineyards or vinification facilities.  They were great brands created by marketing. Connected to investing is being consistent in making a long-term commitment to marketing.  Another proven fact is that when you stop marketing, your sales decline. The market forgets. There are simply too many options.

One of the presenters at the last VinItaly had a slide that read, “No one needs your wine,” and another that read, “If your wine did not exist, the people drinking it today would happily drink something else.”  If I was in the wine business, I’d have those slides up on my wall.

What makes the Spanish wine category so unique, so special compared to other major wine-producing countries like France, Italy, or even the US?

I’ve listed a lot of things already:  diversity, value, authenticity, etc.  But what I haven’t noted and may be the greatest asset is the willingness for self-examination and adopting a new direction.  Last year, I worked with ICEX and the Spanish Trade Commission here in New York to convene an advisory council of, most notably, leaders in distribution, retail, foodservice and education but not of producers. This showed a willingness to listen to the market and the advice from customers, not focusing only on the internal constituency in Spain. We’re currently conducting large consumer and trade market research, and this approach—to listen to the market and then make changes to align Spain with market needs—is going to pay great dividends in coming years.

Jon Stamell has been advising food and wine producers on marketing and strategy issues for nearly 30 years.  He developed the successful Vibrant Rioja marketing campaign strategy and currently is consulting for Wines From Spain and ICEX in developing a new strategy for the American market. 

Tags: Albariño, Baby Boomers, Bordeaux, Burgundy, California, Chardonnay, digital, French wine, Gen X, Glen Ellen, Godello, ICEX, Italian wine, Millennials, Pinot Grigio, Ribera, Rioja, Rueda, Spain, Spanish Trade Council, U.S. wine market, Verdejo, Vibrant Rioja, VinItaly, Viura, wine, Wines From Spain, yellowtail

With each passing day, it seems as if the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and while our economy expands, the divide between rich and poor gets wider and wider. Sound like an exaggeration? Perhaps not. Read Neil Irwin’s article in this past weekend’s NY Times, “The Benefits of Economic Expansions Are Increasingly Going to the Richest Americans”. Irwin cites data compiled by Pavlina R. Tcherneva, an economist at Bard College to prove this disturbing trend, although none of this should be a surprise.

Two charts in the article tell the story well. The first (below) shows the share of income growth received by the top 10 percent and bottom 90 percent of earners during periods of economic expansion.

I grew up in the 1950’s and 1960’s, began my work career in the 1970’s and reached a modicum of business success in the 1980’s and 1990’s. My father was a doctor. We went on family vacations when I was little. I went to good schools and ultimately raised a family and owned my own business. I wanted for nothing. Life was and still is good. As a child and teen growing up in inner city Detroit, it always seemed like the auto factories were humming, the shops were full and growth in prosperity, while not perfect, was being shared.

According to I.R.S. data, I’ve been among the 10% who’ve benefited from expansions for many years. Yet, it doesn’t take much other than a look at the daily papers or a walk around any American city to see that something doesn’t seem quite right. Shoppers seem well-heeled, coiffed and comfortable among my top tier peers. But why, I wonder, when I walk into Home Depot, Walmart or the local supermarket, I rarely see exuberant shoppers from lower and middle classes? You may think it’s the stores I shop in only cater to my types but I travel and like to walk around and check in on the retail scene to get a flavor of the local zeitgeist.

The second chart from the article (below) shows the share of income gains during expansionary periods that went to the top 1 percent versus bottom 99 percent. The trend in wealth gains becomes even more striking.

 Before I saw these charts. I always thought things seemed to change for the worse in the 1980’s. That was when the idea of “trickle down economics” came into vogue and was put into practice. The idea was that if we cut taxes for the well-off, the additional amount they gain will “trickle down” to the middle and lower classes. But I always wondered how that could be. After all, I could only buy one car every few years, one boat, one house, etc., nothing like what hundreds, thousands or millions of people making less than me could do if they had the money. So how could the benefits that I and my fellow 10 percenters (alas, I’ve never made it into the top 1%) really make a difference in the prosperity of all. The answer as we can see from the data is that they couldn’t and haven’t.

Political forces on the right are quick to criticize programs that provide targeted job training, assistance to inner city residents and businesses, raising the minimum wage or any program that puts more money toward raising the lower class and taking away from the wealthy. Their answer is always to just lower taxes as the benefits will trick down for all. It’s been nearly 35 years since we’ve been practicing “trickle down” and we haven’t seen it trickle anywhere yet except to the top. In case you’ve forgotten Einstein’s oft quoted definition of insanity, it seems to fit here: “Insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result.”

 Our Congress can’t seem to do anything constructive to pass sensible solutions and our President can’t persuade them to because one party thinks it’s its job is to undermine his term. And we go to the polls and re-elect the same clowns who can’t interpret the data, read the charts or come up with any compromise that might try something different to help. In 1811, a smart guy named Joseph de Maistre, wrote “Every country has the government it deserves.” We often think that quote was intended for our “exceptional” America. It was actually directed toward Russia, a country, then and now, of rich oligarchs separated from the lower classes by their profligate wealth. Sound familiar?

Tags: Americans, Assumptions, Bard College, Change, Congress, Corporate Myopia, Democrats, Demographics, divide between rich and poor, Governments, Income gains, Insanity, Joseph de Maistre, Leadership, Neil Irwin, New York Times, Outcomes, Pavlina R. Tcherneva, President Obama, Republicans, Situation Analysis, taxes, top 1 percent, top 10 percent, trickle down economics

In my previous blog post, I invited readers to take a survey about customer engagement.  More than 200 people have taken the survey and you still can.  Simply click the link:  http://surveydirectlink.com/survey/?name=engagement.

We’ve received some very thoughtful comments from people defining what customer engagement is, how companies do it wrong and best practices for doing it right.  In a few weeks, we’ll close the survey and then publish a summary so that you can read what people wrote.  If you take the survey, you’ll automatically receive the executive report.  But even if you don’t take it and you watched Karen Trudell’s Abundance of Gratitude interview series, you can receive the report.

If you’d like to register for Karen’s interview series, go to http://www.sweetperfection.org/abundance-of-gratitude

Again, if you’d like to take the customer engagement survey while it’s still open, go to this link:  http://surveydirectlink.com/survey/?name=engagement.

(BTW, if you’re using an older version of MS Explorer, you may have some issues with the survey working properly but if you simply take it on Chrome, Firefox or Safari, you’ll breeze through it.  It’s very short.)

To receive an executive summary of the survey results, just enter your email address here:

Tags: Brand Building, brand loyalty, Customer engagement, Customers, Engagement, gratitude, market research, Outcomes, Survey