Product Placement/Collaboration - A Journey from Vicarious to Personal Experience

Product Placement is formally defined as - "any form of audio-visual commercial communication consisting of the inclusion of or reference to a product, a service or the trade mark thereof so that it is featured within a programme..". Its about time we change the "..featured within programme" part in that definition, as the product is not placed far away in a movie reel anymore, it is within its actual intended customer's reach, and sometimes literally in his hands!

From FedEx in Cast Away to Coke in Taal and from modern family's apple ipad show to the Safari Storme's presence in the Indian TV series 24, the product placement was pretty much a vicarious experience, with its relevance preserved and communication cascaded through the scene's. The TG not only related with the product through the associated actor and story line, but also the brand message was succinctly absorbed. But the tactic soon started to be overused to an extent that the two essential component for product placement's success, relevance and integration were given a back seat and mindless visibility drove the fad. Soon, more often than not, the placements started to be first ridiculed and then conveniently ignored by the audience.

This trend was slightly arrested by bringing a higher credibility to the product's relevance and its integration with a real-life situation (instead of story line), by taking products a little closer to 'reality'. The wave of product placement in the so-called "Reality Shows" struck and we started seeing bottled beverages consumed by the judges' and motorbikes being ridden by the contestants. Since, the audience generally believed that the reality shows are for real (yes, it did then and it still does!), the products were brought closer to the real target audience with much ease, piggybacking on the credibility and fan-following of judges and contestants of these shows.

Parallel to this, another wave of product placements brought this marketing tactic even closer to its audience by the means of enhancing the 'reality' content to highest level thus far. It must be noted that the product placement in sports has been there for a long time, but never been given so much prominence, as it is been given now. The strongest argument in favour of product placement in sports is that it is as real as it gets (fingers crossed!) and hence the audience is able to relate to the product communication and promise in an empowered way, as the customer attributes the purchase decision to a strong and credible show of trustworthiness by the product/brand through sports ambassadors in a real sporting event.

While, many would have thought that this is as closer as the product placement can get to its customer,  i recently came across two on-field executions  where the product is placed further closer to its target audience(literally in audience's hands!). Relevance and Seamless Integration - the two basic pillars for a successful product placement strategy are excellently preserved.

The first one was Ms Hema Malini promoting "The World's Best RO Purifier"(What?) at 30000 fts, while the very welcomed 'complimentary' paper cup with water (assuming RO purified!) is served (How?) in an Indigo flight (Where?). A simple cup of water served with an ad by an aggressive and innovative water purifier company, in a set-up where everyone has lots of time to notice, watch and analyse (When?), a sweet spot is hit.

The second execution was of mindfully placed 'Tempo' hand sanitizers on each table at a McDonalds restaurant. A beautiful multi-pronged placement strategy -

• Promoting an easy to use hand sanitizer with a pleasant fragrance (What?)
• Invoking hygiene and health concerns when people are about to eat food (When?)
• Making the product available at arm's reach on the same table where the food is placed (Where?)
• Allowing customers to try the product for free (How?)
• Gain customer mind-share, especially with a very dominant player present in the segment

The above two product placement (& collaboration) strategies with their multi-pronged targeting demonstrates a never ending world of opportunities to market product and brands with placement anc collaboration strategies.

Also, these executions open hosts of other avenues for product placements/collaboration well beyond the traditional audio-visual commercial avenues that forms the basis of the widely accepted definition of product placement.

Certainly, the product placement as a marketing strategy has brought the products once marketed by TV actors in the movies and vicariously experienced by the audience, to the very hands of its target customers where the story line is not just real, but is also personal and tha too, to each one!

Cheers,.

The Indian e-commerce Industry – Boom or Bubble?

The e-commerce euphoria in Indian business landscape is accentuating and investors are queuing up for putting their money into the ‘future’. Within the last 15 months foreign hedge funds, asset managers and investment firms have invested almost $4 billion in just 26 Indian technology and e-commerce start-ups.

A recent report published by UBS on e-commerce in India suggested that Indian e-tail market—which is currently valued at $16 billion will grow to an astonishing $50 billion by 2020. The report also projected that the ‘loss making’ sector will begin to make clear profits by 2020.


While such positive projections for the sector is definitely encouraging, some deep dive is needed to bring out the realities of this seemingly simple but grossly misunderstood business. Indian e-commerce industry is at a fascinating point of its journey, but one needs to have a more realistic view on its growth engine.

The Rosy Picture

The Indian e-commerce sector received more than $5 billion in funding in 2014, compared to $1.6 billion in 2013 and $760 million in 2012. Of this, in 2014, Flipkart raised some $1.9 billion while Snapdeal found about $1 billion in funding.

Together, these two online shopping firms are now valued much, much higher than the total market capitalisation of India’s major brick-and-mortar retailers, which have dozens or even hundreds of physical shops

A major reason cited for strong growth of online retailers compared to brick and mortar retailers is latter's capex and operational efficiency requirements  which restrains their ia do not have enough bandwidth or speed to counter e-commerce retailers.This bestows upon a huge opportunity for scaling e-commerce segment to new heights, considering an estimated $ 500 billion retail market in India.


The phenomenal valuations for India’s e-commerce companies are based on the premise that Asia’s third-largest economy presents a vast opportunity for online retailers. Specific reasons cited for optimism around the industry are as follows:

• Internet population - With 200 million active Internet users, India is next only to America’s 250 million and China’s 550 million internet users 
• Rising incomes levels – India’s per capita income has risen to $1,500 increasing the purchasing power, especially for 350 million strong middle and upper class 
• Demography – Two-thirds of India’s population is under 35 -- the demographic that makes up the largest share of the country's Internet users 
• Expected long term profitability of e-commerce firms – With the market maturing and consolidating, the discount regime will fade away improving profitability of the companies 
• Drawing parallel between India’s e-commerce market with that of China’s – India is often looked upon as China of mid 2000s and lot of analysts draw a parallel between how the Chinese markets grew from then till now, to how the Indian market will grow from now to till the next 10 years

A Rose without thorns? Not exactly…

To the anguish of many, the highly anticipated deal between Alibaba and Snapdeal fell apart in the month of March earlier this year. The reason behind the deal was disagreement on the valuation that the Indian firm sought. Apparently Snapdeal was looking for a valuation between $6 billion and $7 billion while Alibaba wanted to commit for a valuation under $5 billion.

Revenue vs Losses

Many analysts believe that the valuation of e-commerce companies is a tricky area as there is lot of untrend-ed future cash flow, which is largely aspirational, and a high level of gut feeling that comes into play during valuation discussions. Interestingly, more often than not, these e-commerce firms who are seeking funding based on certain valuations aspirations, are not making any money at the moment.

Mr K. Vaitheeswaran founder of Indiaplaza.com says, “E-commerce is a hard business. You need time and scale to make money. But at some stage there must be an intention to make money. I think there is no plan to make money because of the infinite supply of investment capital. I’m not surprised they are not making money because they are not even planning on making money”

According to the USB’s report, Flipkart, Amazon India and Snapdeal reported a combined revenue of $85 million and a loss of $163 million in FY14. To put it simply, for every $ earned, $ 3 were spent by the companies.

Globally, Amazon.com, has not had sustained earnings even after two decades of operations. It became profitable in 2007 but since then earnings have been dwindling. It reported a net loss of $241 million in 2014.

Apart from the intrinsic issues pertaining to the valuations, profitability and business models of e-commerce companies, external issues such as government’s digital investment, digital infrastructure, regulations and policies are major challenges for the Indian e-commerce industry.

• India has been placed at 115th rank on broadband speed in a recent united nations’ study on ecommerce environment 
• India’s regulatory environment for e-commerce remains unclear as the government is strongly opposed to the idea of 100% FDI in B2C ecommerce, often citing close environment in China and Japan 
• India’s tax authority has also had troubles in aligning tax laws for the e-commerce industry leading to arbitrary actions which has affected the overall business ease in the segment. 
• As per The United Nations, India ranked 83rd out of 130 countries in terms of its e-commerce environment, judged by factors such as the number of Internet users, availability of secure servers and credit-card usage 
• The AT Kearny’s 2015 Global E-commerce index based on parameters such as online market size, Consumer behaviour, Growth potential and Infrastructure was published recently. India failed to even make into the 30 country list.

Just as China, India? No way…

Flowery comparisons have been made between Indian and Chinese e-commerce markets and many have conveniently believed that just like the e-commerce sector grew by leaps and bound in China, the fate of the Indian e-commerce market will be a replica.

E-commerce market of top-10 countries and the growth recorded on last year

Unfortunately, there remains host of differences between the two markets which need a sincere mention:

• At $1,500, India’s per capita income is less than a quarter of China’s $6,800 which does not seem to be catching up anytime sooner 
• China has the biggest e-commerce market volume in the world at $ 426 billion which happens to be about 85 times that of India’s e-commerce market, just too big to compare at this point 
• Chinese internet users are much more sophisticated users than that of Indian users. One third of its online users are connected continuously while 58% are online between 2- 4 times a day 
• Also, China, has an e-commerce market which is more than 10 times bigger in terms of contribution than that of India. Interestingly, China also happens to have a bigger online market contribution then more developed countries like US, Japan, France and Germany. UK is the only market in top-10 markets which has a higher contribution of e-commerce in overall retail market than China 

Online retail contribution as a % of total retail

Hence, the comparison between the two markets and countries on this front suggests that it may not be a fair assumption that Indian now is what China was 7-8 years back and what worked for China then, will work for India now.


Conclusion

With only 39 million online buyers, that translates into approximately 3.2% of the total population, online market place still is at a nascent stage in India, Though the 27% growth in the e-commerce market in India in 2014 looks flattering, the high growth figure is actually due to its very small base. The sector is currently seeing headwinds in terms of sky rocketing valuations and huge employee benefits, but monetising and making the industry profitable will remain a challenge in these times.

Top-10 e-commerce markets by the AT Kearney's Global e-commerce incdex

Government support is absolutely critical on infrastructure point of view to increase user penetration. Also, a more transparent policy on regulation and tax structure will go a great way to strengthen the fundamentals of e-commerce industry in India.

E-commerce industry in India is going through an aggressive transformation and while it can be the sunshine sector for growth, it is imperative to understand the limitations and risks in the sector, and handle these risks effectively. Addressing these risks should be our top most priority to avoid this boom turn into a bubble. It is possible only when euphoria over virtual cash flows, imaginary cash rich P&L statements and outrageous valuations makes way for a structured growth plan across the business parks and government corridors, backed by more realistic aspirations, but of course, with the same enthusiasm.


Cheers,

EpicFail #StarbucksRaceTogether

A seemingly well intentioned campaign to encourage conversation on 'race' at the starbucks has gone supremely awry.

Why should a benign act of trying to encourage conversation on coffee about a very sensitive but recently battered issue face such backlash? With the benefit of hindsight, the answer is simple - Inability to on-board your internal and external stakeholders, both on emotional as well as practical aspect.


The Baristas who were to set forth the campaign by tagging and encouraging people to write "Race together" on their coffee cups, were never on-boarded. It came across as a irrelevant exercise for them which made their daily job more tiring with no visible change.

This gap also led to a sense of insincerity to flow across, right up to the customers which led to what is explained in the next paragraph, revulsion. Great campaigns can fail if your field team is not convinced about the vision and objective of the campaign. To add, ease and practicality of implementation must be thoroughly planned and demonstrated before pushing the campaign down the chain up to the foot-soldiers, to avoid making it a boo boo.

 Race is a sensitive topic and with the recent flare ups in US on the subject have led to an open yet sometimes an ugly debate with opinions and counter opinions being blasted. While the intention may be absolutely honest, this sudden campaign rubbed the general public the wrong way as it did come out as a marketing gimmick.

As mentioned above, there was no serious attempt to actually diffuse tensions and encourage positive environment. The operational way of tagging #RaceTogether(rather than an emotional effort by the Baristas) made the customers feel that Starbucks is trying to piggy back a sensitive issue for its own marketing advantage.

The campaign is ordered to be halted prematurely.

Lesson learnt the hard way!