Open Source CU: Credit Union Blog

What if the rest of the world was like a credit union?

Posted by Brent Dixon on December 19th, 2008

45 comments

Great credit union awareness campaign from the fine folks at Boom Creative.

Check out the other two spots here and here.

(via the WhatTheB.com)

Posted in Advertising, Purpose

Comments

Leave a response

Jeffry Pilcher on December 20th, 2008 said:
I like the spot.

Are credit unions that transparent?
Morriss Partee on December 21st, 2008 said:
This is the opposite of great. These are truly awful. So the message is that a credit union is a place where you enter, then are told that the offerings are crap that you should not be buying. Basically, you are a stupid moron for wanting to purchase something in the store. Ummm, that’s not what a credit union is.

There’s a good thought in here, obfuscated by byzantine execution.

The message I took away is that someone thinks that restaurant wine is a rip-off, and that going to a gym is a waste of money. The closest thing to truth is the store discount in order to get you to take the store credit card. But even that one goes to absurdity by saying your socks are going to cost hundreds of dollars.

If this is truly what credit unions are like, I wouldn’t dare set foot inside one for fear of being ridiculed for wanting to purchase something that the institution offers for sale.

I can’t tell who these were made for, but I pray they don’t see the light of day further than what they already have.

Oh, and by the way, the proper grammar is “what if rest of the world were like a credit union.”
Michael on December 22nd, 2008 said:
This commercial made perfect sense.

The commercial is as if two people enter a bank and the bank’s representative is telling them not to open an account with them. Instead, go somewhere else like a credit union.

What I got from this was why choose a bank for a financial institute when it makes more sense to join a credit union.

Why pay fees for a checking account in a commercial bank that accrues little to no interest, when you can open an account at a credit union that will accrue a lot more interest and not be charged fees.
Morriss Partee on December 22nd, 2008 said:
Seriously, you got from this commercial that walking into a restaurant is like walking into a bank? There is no possible way you can draw that analogy from this commercial. Only a CU insider could ever see it that way. There is no mention of a bank at any point in any of these commercials. Ever. Which is a good thing. But then it makes it next to impossible to explain the analogy in 30 seconds. Which it doesn’t even attempt to do.

There is just no possible way for the non-industry person to understand the message being attempted to be conveyed in any of these commercials. I’m sorry; it’s just way too big a leap.
Brent Dixon on December 22nd, 2008 said:
Credit unions put smart, responsible financial decisions over their ability to make some extra coin. Which makes them a lot different from other financial institutions. Is that really that big a leap?

But Pilcher’s question is right on – it’s a great thought, in theory. Does it happen in practice?
Brent Dixon on December 22nd, 2008 said:
Also, this .
Sara Dyer on December 22nd, 2008 said:
I liked these. I think about some of the other commercials I have seen for CUs in general (the Super Bowl ads from a few years ago pop into my head immediately) and these were so much more original, funny and professional.

Maybe I was reading too much into them, but the reason I did like them so much was I felt the CU employee would take the time to find you the best product/service for you, and not sell you the flavor of the week.
Daniel Thorpe on December 22nd, 2008 said:
Thanks for putting the spots up! We’re the creators of them, and we think they’re dead on the mark in today’s environment. I’d love to discuss the thinking behind these – with anyone. I shop at clothing stores, have been a gym member for years and eat out way more than I’d like. These commercials are all about people making correct decisions, and businesses (like credit unions) who support their customers’ making correct decisions.

I had the pleasure of working three years at Spokane Teachers Credit Union. During that time, their people continually acted in their members’ best interests. We’ve worked with 15 credit unions across the nation and from the stories we’ve heard from their members, we’ve gleaned that a key difference of credit unions is they think with their members’ best interest in mind. (Sara, you were right on with your thinking…your response was exactly what we wanted to achieve.)

Wow…byzantine execution! Egads! (Actually, “byzantine” is an adjective I never thought I’d hear applied to our work.) Yeah, um…no.

OK, let me spell out our thinking. Every day, we are assaulted by merchants who see us as a mark. I’ve been a gym member for years, yet when my daughter joins the club, she’s hit on for $75 personal trainer sessions. Restaurants DO make their money on wine and liquor sales. I’ll buy the Pinot Noir sometimes, but sometimes, it’s in my best interest to get the house red. And yes, you can pay ridiculous amounts of interest and late fees on credit cards.

RE: “was’ vs. “were,” we debated it at length between what was colloquial and what was pompous, blowhard speak. We opted for the colloquial (and, yes, incorrect) version. We may actually use that in a subsequent version. These are still prototype spots and this question was one of the reasons we posted it on Vimeo.

We’ve got several more executions in the works of other scenarios where businesses should be like a credit union. We think the campaign is truthful, creative and extendable!
Charlie Trotter on December 22nd, 2008 said:
What makes it read wonky to me is the CU person goes “off script” to give me the honest advice, instead of leading with it. I get the metaphor they are going for, but I honestly had to work for it a little.
Morriss Partee on December 22nd, 2008 said:
Hi Daniel, I apologize for hating on these commercials. I really want to like them, and appreciate anyone trying to advance the credit union movement and enlighten more people to the benefits of CU membership.

I can tell a lot of time and effort went into producing these spots. And I totally understand the thinking behind them. But the average person is just never going to think to themselves “oh, I get it, if I were at a credit union, they would tell me what is overpriced (like wine at a restaurant), what is a loss-leader that locks you into a long contract (like at the gym), or what is a teaser discount to get you suckered into high interest rates (like at the Apricot store). SO therefore, I should run right over to my credit union and….....”

Do what? Open a checking account? See if I can refinance my auto loan at a lower rate? Take out a home equity loan? Transfer my CDs over there? Get my credit report pulled and explained to me? Look at my entire loan picture to determine which things I could refinance and save money on?

The above scenarios are just a handful of possible valid ones for a CU to promote, but the ads don’t suggest anything like it.

The point I’m trying to make here is that there is no connection between the commercials, and actually doing something at a credit union. Or even giving me some idea of why I should join a CU or what I should do at one.

Honestly, I’d start completely over. What message to you want the viewer to leave with? I guarantee if you show any of these ads to people off the street, and ask them what idea these were trying to convey, not one of them will say “I need to run right out to my credit union and have them tell me what financial services are in my best interest.” I bet hardly anyone would even say the message is “At a credit union, employees will tell you which financial products to purchase based on what is in your best interest.”

I do hope you get a chance to test these with a few members of the public before they go to air.
Andy LaFlamme on December 23rd, 2008 said:
I get it, and everybody that reads OSCU will probably get the analogy, but would an industry outsider get it…probably not.

I understand that the waitress is going out of her way to save her customers money at the expense of restaurant profit. I understand what they were going for, but to try and show a difference that intangible to people that don’t know the difference exists in the first place is difficult.

And I would also be interested in an answer to Jeffery’s question…do we really do this? Are we really that transparent? I’m sure some CU’s are, but that’s the problem with the whole national branding thing. Unless its consistent across all credit unions it falls flat. Like this ad.

Funny spot, and well made, but it doesn’t adequately convey the message; especially to an industry outsider.
Leah Mow on December 23rd, 2008 said:
I’d like to take a second to chime in here. In the interest of being transparent, I am a graphic designer at Boom.

One of the philosophies we bring to all of the work we do is to never underestimate our audience. Today’s consumers are sophisticated and savvy about marketing messages. They are suspicious of ads that “sell.” Because of this a lot of advertising and communication simply does not break through the din and following the same old script will not help you do this. Sure we are a little off-beat, we’re not necessarily trying to be that way—it’s in our DNA. And our experience shows us that off-beat is the beat that gets heard above all the other noise.

Interestingly, most of the people we showed these ads to, prior to releasing them, were not “industry insiders.” Quite the opposite. In fact most of them they were members of that coveted Gen Y, that marketing and adverting people seem to always be trying to reach. Not only did they completely get the idea, they seemed to also engage with it.

The fact of the matter is, we don’t create messages that are business-as-usual. We want to do more than that, and we want more than that for the people our messages connect with.

That said, thanks for engaging with our work, for better or for worse. We’re happy it sparked some conversation.
Rod Keller on December 23rd, 2008 said:
Funny thing, advertising.

The spots that tend to do well are those that are relatable, differentiating and define the brand in some way to the consumer. Interestingly, this is actually not just my opinion, its based on more than 40 years of advertising research. So, let’s talk about rational research-based stuff for a minute or two.

Are these spots relatable? Yes. We’ve all been in these situations before. And we can all relate to being ripped off by marketers, and by being given ‘head nod’ marketing fairy tales whilst they fleece us as they smile. The restaurant spot has the broadest relevance, the clothing store comes next, then the gym. Come on, we have all been there, and we all know it’s a racket.

Are these spots differentiating? Hell yes. These spots use a proven positioning strategy: they re-position the competition, making them look like liars and cheats (without directly coming out and saying it). Credit Unions then, are the antidote. Of course they differentiate credit unions… it’s the central gist of the ads.

Do these spots give the consumer some definition of the brand? Yes, they do. Now I have seen a few of these blogs above, about the fact that there is no ‘information’ in these spots. Funny thing, that. The research I have done, and seen (and by the way I work for the biggest ad research company in the world), tell us pretty clearly that ‘information’ is incredibly subjective. And the thing about marketing financial services is that it is NOT ABOUT RATES. It’s about trust. So, do these spots get that across? Gee, I dunno. 

This creative is a little bit light on the RTBs (that is shorthand for “reasons to believe” for those who are outside the marketing box), but the thing is (and I bet it is going to be a hard thing for some people to accept): sometimes the RTB can be demonstrated by a non-linear, non-fact-based scenario. Guess what? That is what these spots do: they are non-linear product demos. Consider that. These ads are product demos.

Remember the early Saturn ad in which the sales people threw the customer a part since it was her first car? Had nothing to do with the car. Product Demo.

Apple’s iPod Dancers? Getting a bit old, but: Product Demo. The whole ad’s a demo.

Mac Versus PC (The Mac ads). No computer. All demo.

The point is that demos are a) important, and b) widely variable. This demo is about an attitude.

One other thing: someone wondered if ‘outsiders’ would get these ads or if they were too aimed at ‘insiders.’ The ads work precisely because they are not dealing with rates, smiling tellers, low, low APRs and all the other traditional ‘insider’ nomenclature. These are total outsider ads. Not a buzzword to be found, wall-to-wall.

Lastly (and this is especially oriented toward all arm-chair ad critics), remember that the golden rule in determining if the ads do the job is to first get clarity on what “the job” is. Do you know? It seems these ads are here to sell the basic difference of a credit union. Do they? Hmmm. I think so.
Tim McAlpine on December 24th, 2008 said:
I have let this one peculate for awhile before commenting. I think the fear of Morriss calling me obfuscated by byzantine as well, delayed my reaction.

I really like these spots (there, I said it).

The credit union industry, as a whole, is fixated on the credit union difference. And that fixation is typically centered around the difference between banks and credit unions. The problem is there is no apparent difference from the outside. All of us industry insiders live and breathe credit unions, but members of the general public and specifically members of Gen Y have no concept what a credit union is much less what is the difference between banks and credit unions.

The idea to compare credit unions to the rest of the world is completely fresh. And brilliant.

I think where some of the commenters above are getting hung up is trying to read too much into these spots. “Is the restaurant a credit union or a bank?” “Does this employee work at a bank or a credit union?”

My interpretation is far more simple. She is an employee of a restaurant giving good advice even though her employer would frown on that.

No bank bashing necessary. No heavy duty metaphors. Just real life. It is almost impossible for all of us to look at this without bias. We all know way too much about credit unions and subconsciously we will try to read more into it than a casual viewer.

Given that this is for a modest credit union promotion, the production value is amazing. The acting is great, the lighting, direction and writing is sharp. I have worked on low-budget TV commercials and I can tell you that these are phenomenal given the constraints.

I think that the work that Boom Creative has done on the WhatTheB.com promotion should be applauded instead of torn down.

Great work to all involved.
Chuck Van Court on December 24th, 2008 said:
I also think the ads will be effective.

The message is simple and I believe will be immediately understood my most: unlike all the other companies out there trying to get over on you, credit unions are about you making decisions that are best for you. Not tough.

Nice job Boom! I hope that this is only the beginning of a larger plan to make the credit union brand mean something, especially with Gen Ys.

Stay true to your beliefs and don’t worry about pleasing every credit union staff or arm-chair quarterback out there.

Chuck
Ed Steenman on December 25th, 2008 said:
Based on the bad national press and flat misinformation about the availability of credit to buy a car, myself and a number of prominent ad agencies here in Seattle solicited, and gained agreement from, local media to air a huge “public service” campaign. It is airing on the NBC, CBS, ABC affiliates and every radio station here, and is thousands of dollars in free exposure.

The ads are a series of positive, truthful messages that consumers really can buy a car for less today (dealers are selling them at lower margins), and that unlike the Mortgage industry, car dealers will actually work with consumers to get them out of cars they can’t afford.

So we do all this and then I see a (national) ad for Nissan that starts with “WHERE OTHERS FAIL, WE DELIVER” – and I have to wonder – what planet are they on?

While I applaud anyone that can wrangle a group of CU’s together to promote, I have to ask the same question. With any product or service, does ANYONE really win when the thrust of the message is running someone else down, rather than telling your own story?
John on December 26th, 2008 said:
From the comments here, at best a split decision. And the public will care even less – way less – than a bunch of industry bloggers. More like a “Dud” than a “Boom”.
Morriss Partee on December 29th, 2008 said:
Tim,

I too applaud the fresh approach here, and applaud that banks are never named as the bad guy. And the production values are impressive.

But I completely agree with you that those of us involved in the industry care way more, and have an insider knowledge and perspective that the general public doesn’t have. That’s why I still stand by the statement that average consumers won’t put 2 & 2 together to see the analogy that’s trying to be painted here. It’s not that they are dumb (I also applaud never underestimating an audience), it’s that it’s extremely difficult to paint a complex analogy effectively in 30 seconds. Sophisticated analogies should be done in print or long-format media, not :30 tv spots. This is a case of this medium not being right for this message.

@Rod – I’m just calling it like I see it. I may be way off base. But I’m not on board with your claims for this ad. Yes, they provide relatable settings, but so what? Do people hate going to restaurants because there is a mark-up on the wine? No. Do people hate going to the gym because most people don’t go? No. People who DO go to the gym are actually being partially funded by all the people who sign up with good intentions and then never quite make it in. People who know wine know that at a restaurant, as a percentage, the higher priced wines are actually marked up less, and therefore provide a better value. It’s all about the context, and everyone will interpret these situations differently. The only one that is close to really honing on a true financially bad situation is the discount on merchandise in order to take a credit card with a likely high interest rate. But even this can be a benefit in the hands of a savvy consumer who will take the discount, then close the credit card after the account is opened.

But my central argument is actually that the scenarios are the central feature of each of these ads, and wrapping it with a brief sentence that this is what the world would be like if everything were a credit union is not making the connection. To me, there’s got to be something more to make this connection than a two-second screen with a sentence at the open and close. In fact, when this is ad is playing during a tv break with several ads, a consumer might not even know that the opening graphic/sentence is connected to the scenario that follows it, losing the connection and therefore the message.

You then go on to say that credit union marketing is not about rates, it’s about trust. I agree. But watching an employee tell me about how awful a deal is at their place of business does not engender ANY feelings of trust for me. It simply brings up the question, how can I trust ANYONE? How do I know the employee is telling me the truth about their employer being shady? How do I know the employee isn’t in cahoots with the employer and is trying to trick me? Going negative in this fashion leaves a bad taste in my mouth, one which a sentence displayed at the beginning and the end doesn’t remove for me. I just don’t think most people are going to see this connection as a positive correlation, and then to tie it to credit unions. To me, much better to be direct, and give a concrete example of why you CAN trust a credit union.

You also say that a product demo can make for a good spot. I certainly agree with that, but then your examples are not product demos. Apple’s FIRST iPod tv ad was a product demo, and as an ad was not particularly memorable (but it’s awesome- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWqj6OQQOHA ). The Mac vs. PC ads are not product demos. And these CU ads are also not product demos. These are more attitude/feeling/lifestyle ads. But again, the CU ads are not fostering a positive feeling towards credit unions, they are fostering a “can I trust anyone at all in today’s world” feeling. With me at least.

Also, Rod, I completely agree that I do not know the context, target and goals for these ads. I’m just giving my initial reaction. I would love to know: who these ads will be run by (a specific CU? A league? an off-the-shelf program that any CU can tag?), who the target audience is, and what the goal for the ad is.

@Tim I was going to give you bonus points for using the word “peculate”, but I think you meant “percolate”. And I didn’t know your ancestors came from Byzantium, but now I do. Still, I don’t think your agency has ever come up with a Byzantine execution, despite your background.

If these ads can elicit half as strong a reaction/conversation in the marketplace as they have here, then it’s a winner.
Tropical Financial Credit Union on December 30th, 2008 said:
Awesome! I love these kind of videos. I posted about the apple spoof credit union videos here: http://tfcu.blogspot.com/2008/08/save-money-with-credit-unions.html
Ed Steenman on December 30th, 2008 said:
Morriss, after reading what you wrote, my first instinct was to defend these spots, but then I thought about what you said about a consumer maybe not even getting them so I showed them to a couple of people, but omitted the first two seconds (the “what if the rest of the world was like a credit union” part)starting right with the people (waitress, etc) part. And guess what, you were right! In addition to not “getting it”, one person actually though the spots were about Credit Unions not telling the truth.
Chuck Van Court on December 31st, 2008 said:
Morriss, how about moving from the sidelines and into the game?

How about posting a campaign you created for credit unions that you believe reflects an effective execution?
John Polnik on January 1st, 2009 said:
The response you’ll get from the target demographic will be a loud and resounding

meh

Really guys, they’ll see right through this veiled attempt to be “real” The spots won’t garner conversation good or bad. They’ll just be passed over while the creative committee hangs out on line “spelling out” their thinking so that a bunch of people who aren’t the target audience can understand what they tried and failed to do.

Yeah, and I’m sorry, but citing the favorable responses of friends of the producers who happen to be Gen-Y demos, hardly falls into objective focus group research.

Oh and production value? Yeah, um…no. I’ve seen Art Institute demos with higher standards. These look like they were shot on pro-sumer grade HDV cameras with whatever lens it came with, poor to minimal lighting, vague production design, bad sound recording, (mixing wasn’t bad) and spastic editing. The director obviously just saw a Steven Soderbergh movie and was trying to convey some hip and cool vision he and the creative committee thought the youngsters would dig, but instead the spots just came off as forced. I also understand that Spokan isn’t exactly a Mecca for acting talent, but the performances ranged from pretty darn good (despite over the top direction) to OMG this person must have been related to the producer to get the part.

Bottom line, these spots are precisely what you’d expect when the creative is done by a bunch of wannabe-director CU industry insiders.

FTL. (The coveted Gen-Y’ers will know what that means.)

BTW, isn’t it a “funny thing” how some people want to discredit criticism of these spots by calling those who would “armchair” critics? Try that with me.
Chuck Van COurt on January 2nd, 2009 said:
John:

Other than demonstrating that you have a massive ego and sharp tongue, how about providing constructive criticism and relevant examples of your work?
Chuck Van Court on January 2nd, 2009 said:
John:

OMG, I just saw that you produced the rapping Together Better ads for credit unions in Wasington state.

Talk about living in glass houses and thowing rocks!
John Polnik on January 2nd, 2009 said:
lol, I was hoping someone would remind the group of the incredibly successful Together Better campaign including the Super Bowl commercial. These are perfect examples of actual breakthrough creative that still has traction to this day. As a credit union advocate, one can only wish for the days when CU spots were memorable.

For those of you who may not remember, the Together Better campaign depicted two likeable guys singing silly songs about the virtues of credit unions much like the Free Credit Report dot com commercials we’ve all seen. Oh, except that we were two years ahead of them. Do you think these new spots will be copied by anyone? Actually, they’re trite copies themselves. Ya know I still meet new people on the street (not my editor’s friends) that recite the lyrics to those songs when they find out I made those spots. Two years later! Do you think anyone will remember these new spots even two seconds after they’ve seen them on TV?

Ya know, we (Ed Steenman and I) were awarded the contract to make commercials for the CUGOG group based not on the Together Better campaign, but rather a Japanese anime concept that depicted CU’s as heroes who save people from big traditional banks. Sound familiar? Oh yeah, the massively successful E-surance campaign, except we came up with it before they did.

As for the Super Bowl commercial, that spot was truly awesome. From a PR standpoint alone, we broke through the clutter with dozens of press mentions including Seattle times, PI, The Stranger stories and multiple TV profiles that ran days and weeks before the spot ran just ONCE! Do you think any news outlet will give a flying hoot about these new ads? Yeah, um…no.

And here’s the rub. The Super Bowl spot aired just ONE time. Yet still, everyone I’ve ever mentioned it to remembers it. They remember the silly Flavor Flav clock around one guy’s neck (Flavor Flav has since made a huge comeback on reality TV BTW) and the “Credit Unions of Washington…Word” line (thanks Kevin Foster) at the end.

Man I enjoyed creating the work we made for the CUCOG group and when I’m deep in the throws of creative committee meetings producing marketing content for little products you may have heard of like Microsoft Vista, and Live Earth at MSN (most downloaded event in history) I like to think

“Credit Unions got the funds like they got my back Cause credit unions ain’t for profit So I stay in the black!”

Anyone need me to spell out my thinking as to what that means?

Word!

Here’s the Super Bowl spot: http://vimeo.com/2164036
Chuck Van Court on January 2nd, 2009 said:
Here’s what Brent said when the spots first came out: This is semi-old news by now, but if you haven’t seen or heard about the Super Bowl spot run by the Credit Unions of Washington, let me go ahead and be the first to tell you that it set the credit union image back by a good decade or two. Click here to see his post.

Brent may have been a bit too harsh, but I too thought the ads were very dorky and memorable for the wrong reasons, but to each his own. The real measure is did they work to bring in new members. John: What demographic was targeted with the ads and did they work?

The success of the Boom’s ads is in the hands of the consumers and we will see how they fare.

Fact your opinions (and anyone’s) are not. WORD.
Ed Steenman on January 4th, 2009 said:
1.During the period of the campaign, according to numbers provided by the client at the time, the member credit unions saw a pretty significant increase in new members that represented I belieive more than a double digit increase over the previous year.
Ed Steenman on January 4th, 2009 said:
1.During the period of the campaign, according to numbers provided by the client at the time, the member credit unions saw a pretty significant increase in new members that represented I belieive more than a double digit increase over the previous year.
Ed Steenman on January 4th, 2009 said:
2. Actually Brent wrote about these ads on several occassions, more harshly at first but then there was further dialogue – I remember an exchange with him, and he was surprisingly (at the time) respectful and over time as I have followed this blog, I have come to very much respect what he has done for the CU industry, even though we may not always agree, we all want the same thing that is to help this industry grow and succeed.

3. I do remember that the posts relating to our ads generated a high number of comments on his then relatively infant site. I also think the level of dialogue on this site has matured, in the “social media” guys – who were pretty darn evangelical at the time – have come to realize that there is a convergence and partnership between “social media” and tradtional media so the lens has changed as two or three years in this business is like twenty.

4. In response to your call for good work, I think you’re in Seattle area too, so I hope you agree that the BECU ads here stand in my mind as very good work- and I don’t know who does them or anything about them, other than I think they represent good work from a strong brand in our industry.

5. I also have to compliment Kevin Foster-Kiddie for his role in bringing a very diverse collection of CU’s together in what was a pretty pioneering fashion at the time. He was a master at diplomacy and letting all the diverse and very opinionated personalities of CU’s large and small feel that they had a stake in our project, but also taking charge and responsiblity for the direction. My point is that it is much easier to create a campaign for one CU, or a “generic” campaign that (if) you get one organization to buy off on, than it is to put together a working collective. I also work with auto dealer groups and you would think that they would take the cake as the most opinionated personalities you could find but believe me when I say that CU marketing VP’s and directors hold there own very well in that department.

6. Lastly, you have called for Morriss to move from the sidelines- and certainly have had a strong opinion about the marketing efforts of others, so how about you do what you have suggested of others here and step and show us some of YOUR work?

I, and I hope the rest of the group here, will look forward to seeing it.
Chuck Van Court on January 4th, 2009 said:
Ed:

Fuze is a customer care software provider to credit unions and many other industries. We are not in the business of marketing and do not have any effective examples to provide.

We have helped many credit unions provide better member care and helped them give their members the knowledge necessary to take more control of their financial lives. We have provided our software to the Washington Credit Union League and the Together Better Web site without charge. We are also a strong supporter of the Movement and have put our money where our mouth is by doing all our business banking with First Tech Credit Union, which is a great partner for us. We believe that credit unions can and do make a difference in people’s lives, but also believe that significant potential value remains untapped because they have not created a recognized brand or fully mobilized their aggregate capabilities. We sincerely care about credit unions being successful.

Since we are not in the business of marketing, we do not presume to even know what an effective branding campaign would look like for a particular demographic. I can only speak for what I relate to as an almost 50, techie-nerd consumer and realize that ultimately any ad’s effectiveness will speak for itself.

I strongly believe that people need to stop attacking and undermining efforts around building a financial co-op brand and start wishing them well, evaluating and learning from the results, and evolving future efforts to make “credit union” actually have meaning on a broad scale.

I too applaud Kevin’s and others’ efforts to allow credit unions to focus on their unique value proposition rather than the inherent one of being a co-op.

I wish Boom and the credit unions doing these ads the best.

I am also glad to hear that the Together Better ads were successful.

Chuck Van Court
Jimmy Marks on January 5th, 2009 said:
Wow, this thread is gettin’ long here.

Morriss Partee and I had a long Twit-scussion on these ads. I said the ads were good because they jogged the brain and made you want to answer the questions they raised. Morriss said (and I thought he made a good point) that the message wasn’t quite clear enough.

After a lot of careful thought, I’ve started to sway more towards Morriss’ way of looking at this. CUs are lacking brand identity, as our friends at Filene have discovered [Read their blog here]. But maybe they don’t need it. Or maybe now’s the time to make it really, REALLY apparent instead of hinting around it.

SIDE NOTE TO BRENT: If this goes on longer than 1 month, you’re the new king of the internet.
Morriss Partee on January 5th, 2009 said:
@jimmymarks Where you been? Brent’s been king of teh internets since he invented it back in 1961 in the back of a Texas bowling alley. Took a lot of extra grease in the ball bearings to get it off the ground, but he knew he had a winner after the State Tournament the following year. Betcha didn’t know the internet started as way to keep everyone updated on the Texas Bowling Championship standings? Yup, you can go to the museum where is all started in dusty Amarillo….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarillo,_Texas

It’s sandwiched between the Helium Museum and the American Quarter Horse Hall of Fame.
Credit Union Warrior on January 5th, 2009 said:
Entertaining? Check.

Professionally made? Check.

Communicates that Credit Unions are trustworthy/honest? Check.

Do I like these ads? You betcha.
Morriss Partee on January 5th, 2009 said:
JimmyMarks and I did have quite the good tweet-versation (errr, I mean communipunch convo) about these, so in case you were interested, here is that one. Since this is from twitter, it reads from bottom to top (unless your name is Merlin, in which case, proceed):

jimmymarks: @mmpartee I don’t know if I’d tear the whole thing down. I just think it could do with a little extra explanation at the end to sum up. Dec 23, 2008 04:09 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks I’d start over. CUs & TV often don’t mix well. Best tv route: specific product offer, i.e. auto refinance that DCU is runnning. Dec 23, 2008 04:05 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee Because I don’t DISLIKE the ads, really, I think they just need that little extra nudge in the CU direction. Dec 23, 2008 04:03 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee Ahh, okay, I get where you’re coming from. What would fix it? A stinger that explains it better, a slogan that explains it better? Dec 23, 2008 04:00 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks Right, but those ads don’t connect the dots in a way that anyone can understand that CU is the product. CU isn’t front & center. Dec 23, 2008 03:57 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee Is that the issue with the “Whole world CU” spots? I think the product is honest input about money. Which CUs do. Dec 23, 2008 03:52 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks LOVE those commercials. Brilliant, hilarious, pithy. AND. THEY. SHOW. THE. PRODUCT. http://tinyurl.com/ek5a Dec 23, 2008 03:47 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee I think this is an example: saying nothing and something all at once. http://tinyurl.com/ek5a5 Dec 23, 2008 03:39 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks Interesting thesis. I will offer: You can possibly do that in a written medium, but not in a :30 second tv format. Dec 23, 2008 03:25 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee The idea is that the “action step” in the ad is self-imposed. You wonder what happened and you find out the facts on your own. Dec 23, 2008 03:19 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee But seriously folks, confusing ads (done well) are memorable, questionable, and drive you to find information for yourself. Dec 23, 2008 03:17 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks HAHAHAHAHAHA! Touché! Dec 23, 2008 03:05 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee Well, let’s say you want to explain Twitter to people. It’s best to couch it in an ancient Indian fable. Dec 23, 2008 03:01 PM GMT

mmpartee: @jimmymarks Are you saying we can confuse people into seeing things clearly? I beg to differ. Example, please. Dec 23, 2008 03:00 PM GMT

jimmymarks: @mmpartee I see where you’re coming from with that, but sometimes you have to be confusing to make things clear. Dec 23, 2008 02:57 PM GMT
Vanessa Henry on January 6th, 2009 said:
Wow, quite a discussion going on. I can see where everyone’s coming from, both those praising and panning the spots. Well, at least those who are trying to be thoughtful about it and not just busily grinding axes…

My impression, when I saw them, was the intended one – a credit union won’t push you to do do what’s not in your best interest. Warm fuzzy, end of commercial. I see that if you go back in and parse it very closely, and try to draw a direct parallel between the actual product being offered at the health club and financial financial services, it might not mesh 100%. But does it need to in order to make the point in a 30 second spot?

It’s great that we’re all looking at the work super closely, but we should be honest about how a television viewer is going to be seeing them. Unless the group of CUs that Daniel has created these for has gone for a hugely expensive ad buy, chances are it’s going to be seen a lot fewer times than the freecreditreport.com drek is (for instance). So the spots need to capture attention and make an impression in only a few viewings. I think these do a great job of that. Do they stand up to deep critical analysis? Depends on the viewer. But how many of them are going to be doing that deep critical analysis anyway?

I think it has a nice tongue-in-cheek aspect yet has a low risk of being grossly misinterpreted. Unlike, I would have to say, the Superbowl spot.
Ellen on January 6th, 2009 said:
Daniel Thorpe for president!
Taylor Harrington on January 6th, 2009 said:
Love it. I’m a college student at the University of Wisconsin – Madison and I think you would have to be a damn fool not to understand the “implied” meaning of these spots. I even laughed at a few of the actors reaction shots.

- Haters wanna hate -

Keep up the good work.
Andy LaFlamme on January 7th, 2009 said:
Simah down nah!

@short, grey hair, glasses

You need to chill out, seriously. Why call anyone who is actually providing input on these spots a d-bag when your only piece of input is putting somebody else down. Get over yourself.

My final thought on these ads. Nobody will care…nobody but us. They aren’t memorable, they aren’t particularly creative, they do not grab my attention as a consumer, they lack a call to action, they do NOT break any molds (no matter how much the guys who made them try to explain how they do).

These ads are the same old, same old advertising. They are boring and generic. Especially if they were aiming to catch Gen-Y (of which I am a part at 21), these ads fall flat. They will instantly disappear into the clutter of marketing messages to never reappear. So, seriously, chill out, accept that these ads are not the most brilliant, creative piece of CU marketing, learn from that, and go make the next one better.
Brent Dixon on January 7th, 2009 said:
Dear kids,

Let’s play nice please.

Thank you,

mgmt
Jamie Chase on January 14th, 2009 said:
As the person responsible for the PR around the Washington Super Bowl ads I’d like to clarify that the talking points were NOT about Ed’s ads, but instead about the great value of the Super Bowl ad buy. It showed that credit unions use their member’s money wisely even when buying sensational things like Super Bowl ads. IT was a great hook.

We intentionally didn’t talk about the poor quality of the rapping super bowl ad, because we didn’t want to open ourselves up to criticism. That’s one of the reasons we strategically pitched that credit unions got a good deal on the placement. And that was the headline and sub content in all of the stories. The Credit Union Times ran a story where we acknowledged our mistakes with the creative. The Washington Credit Union League provides amazing support to its members. As a result, the committee did extensive research to significantly change direction away from those rapping ads.

As for the anime ads the target audience for insurance maybe men, but for banking the primary decision maker is women. It disturbed several of us on the committee that Ed and John ignored that strategic focus when they presented the anime ads. It disturbs me more that they believe it is still a good idea.

Daniel, It is clear why you’ve won the national credit union award for best advertisement. This is another great ad.
Chuck Van Court on January 19th, 2009 said:
Jamie: Thanks for setting the record straight. I am still not quite sure what John had hoped to accomplish with his rant and attack on Boom.

Unfortunately I leave this thread with the conclusion that too many people that read or at least comment on this blog are more concerned about how they are viewed and for getting attention for their “brand” rather than advancing the CU movement.

I am also tired of the apathy and willingness to only undermine any attempts to create a brand identity for credit unions as a whole. Debate it all you want, but “credit union” means little to most people.

I wish you all well.

Over and out.

Chuck Van Court
Ed Steenman on January 19th, 2009 said:
Like George Bush, my friend Jamie Chase is engaging in some revisionist history. The Super Bowl ads were definitely not created in a vacuum. Trust me, there were lots and lots of meetings, zoomerang surveys, conference calls, “suggestions”, revisions and more revisions all of which the “committee” and Jamie very actively participated in.

There was also lots of discussion about the “target audience”, who the ads would reach, and as the “industry source”, Jamie had as much, if not more, to say about this as anyone. So if she now wants to now trash people like Kevin Foster Kidde, go ahead. But I stand by his commitment to try and move the industry (and the group) forward at that time.

Yes, the ads generated controversy within the industry and the “marketing experts” involved (other than Kevin) changed their tunes real quick when a little heat was applied. Funny thing is, a good portion of that heat was generated by the question of “how can a bunch of not for profits like the Credit Union group afford to buy uber-expensive Super Bowl ads?” which Jamie paints as “selling them on the good deal they got” when the reality was defending to the bosses how the marketing types could have ever green lighted the money to make and buy a Super Bowl ad when “we’re a humble little Credit Union”. Dear Jamie can spew whatever she wants, but the fact is that at no point were any customers ever actually asked what they thought about the ads. Apparently they didn’t hate it, because there was a healthy increase in membership during the course of the campaign. That fact is indisputable. Show me ANYTHING that the Credit Union Group has done since that has produced anything close to that level of discussion, or results.

@ Jamie and Daniel. Jamie, last I heard you were working at an agency in Tacoma, so conceivably now YOU have the job of creating campaigns. For you, and Daniel, the opinions on this board, mine included, are secondary to the RESULTS of any campaign you produce. If you BELIEVE in it, RUN IT, but if you want us to care, SHOW US SOME TANGIBLE RESULTS: who ran it, when did it run, what did it accomplish.

I think that’s what’s supposed to be happening here.

Oh and @ Jamie. P.S. I’m sure Esurance is busy debating whether their anime ads target men versus women – all the way to the bank (or Credit Union). They’re only the most successful on-line insurance provider in their industry.
Jamie Chase on February 17th, 2009 said:
Thanks for asking, Ed. I’m not at an advertising agency. I am enrolled in the only program in the world to offer a Masters in the Management of Co-operatives and Credit Unions. I’m doing great things to help the world and it is very rewarding. Unveiling a big mystery project at the CUNA GAC next week. Our goal is to save consumers $300 million.
Alan Brown on February 17th, 2009 said:
Interesting conversation about advertising for credit unions. My firm works with BECU, and we just launched some new spots in mid-January. You can see 2 ( of the 3 that were finished) here at www.wearebecu.org. Just curious what you all think. Thanks.
Ed Steenman on March 10th, 2009 said:
I have mentioned that I am a fan of BECU’s advertising in a number of my posts. I think they are an example of credit union advertising done right (Brent if you ever wanted to post those I think the group would really see value in them). P.S. I also joined BECU in part because of the ads. Keep up the good work!

Your name
Your blog (optional)
Your email (optional)
Your message

What if the rest of the world was like a credit union?

Comments

Categories

Links