Seeing the light

When I  worked for large corporates there was often a regular parade of inventors anxious to convince us to strike a deal with them to produce and market their latest world- beating product.

The typical pitch fell somewhere between Britain's got Talent auditions and the Dragon's Den, neither of which were on air then. It was also before the Internet offered a valuable research tool to check them out. For the inventors the prize would be some royalty deal where we took on board the expense of engineering the product for manufacture, testing, standards compliance, investing in tooling, producing the product and marketing. Why did big companies with their own significant research and development teams bother to entertain what was typically a succession of self-deluded or simply crazy inventors? First they might just have genuine breakthrough in an area of interest that had eluded us and further more they might hold a patent. More realistically it was case of not wanting to miss out on a great possibility, much like in the pop music world of not wanting to be known as the manager who failed sign up the Beatles.

Into this odd aspect of our product management life breezed Myron Khan, an American inventor of polarizing lighting panels. A number of things combined to make this Dragon's Den style bid for support more interesting than most. At Thorn Lighting we already produced acrylic lighting panels which typically comprised multiple rows of small pyramids for lighting control. What's more, my boss the head of marketing had recently conducted a fact finding tour of the USA. Here he had observed the widespread adoption of suspended ceilings in offices and stores which used troffer lighting fittings which could be dropped into a ceiling module instead of ceiling tiles. Further more, on the premise that American building trends were ahead of the UK, visiting America gave a glimpse of the future. Already,  on the strength of his report a suspended ceiling company in Slough had been  purchased positioning Thorn for this promised future. Coincidentally Polarised sun glasses were en vogue in the early 1970s and created a premium, high tech eyeware sector as opposed to the 'dar'glasses we then bough from Woolworths or Boots.  And just to complete the picture the price of oil quadrupled in1973 prompting urgent calls for energy cuts of which lighting was a major culprit .

Myron Kahn who was not one for holding back, presented his  Polarised panels as the saviour of civilisation as we knew it. It seemed like a no-brainer - easy to retrofit polarised lighting panels that offered not only energy savings, but sharper vision, reduced glare and less eye strain and all to go into the suspended ceiling lighting fittings we expected would sell in their tens of thousands. But there was one niggling little problem  (there  were others) and that was the science of his panels. No recognised scientific expert seemed willing to endorse these claims. Worse still the American Illuminating Engineering Society the body that amongst other things set recomended lighting levels for illumination levels, refused to even mention Myron's polarized panels in their publications.

The fundamental issue was understanding how the  functioning of polarisation which had been implemented via a rather dull coating sheet applied to an other wise standard acrylic panel actually worked. A favourite way of demonstrating polarisation was to rotate polarised lenses and observe a reduction in light - great for sun glasses. There were a series of marketing/technical meetings with Myron Kahn largely to convince us how it worked. We were invited to observe how much better the colours of an R & D manager's tie appeared under this polarised light. Ever the showman Myron somehow contrived to appear on the BBC television news as the first  American  business to fly into Heathrow on the inaugural flight of Concorde. He intimated he was dashing to Britain to sign a multi million dollar contract. For some reason there was no reference to meeting some cynical product mangers in Slough!

The polarized panels enjoyed little success in the UK and were hideously expensive. The benefit of troffers was cheapness as the ceiling grid provide much of the support structure. The prismatic panel sheets which controlled the light distribution carried big, big mark ups. It was where we made our money.


Footnote:
There is little about Myron Kahn to be found on the Internet, apart that is, for a fulsome Obituary in the Los Angeles Times. In an eulogy that reads like one of his own sales brochures he was described as "the darling of  economists, ergonomists and conservastionists."

RSS - a news feed idea that won't go away

Social media has given new life to the term news feed.

Just about 10 years ago in this blog I wrote is RSS about to take off as a marketing tool? We had been offering RSS  to clients for 2 years or so by then, but it never really got a mass following despite being a neat technology. And like many other clever ideas it seemed doomed to stay just that - a neat idea. One thing that persuaded us was that the BBC  was using RSS  and it is still carried on their news sites now.

Last year I  wrote about RSS again, asking is RSS about to make a come back?  Perhaps it has found a niche. The explanation provided by the BBC says it all really. It allows you to view the latest additions to web sites you are interested in - all in one place.

Great idea in a busy world. May be RSS  will still be going in another 10 years!

Talking about news publication

Before Internet, news publication in the b-2-b sector was relatively simple.

Basically to get news published you sent your news by way of press releases to the editors of the relevant trade press and hoped. Sometimes you could 'pitch' a story to the editor and be commissioned to write an article and even, many years ago for the author to be paid. For the smaller stories you hoped yours would be selected for publication - most press releases went straight to the trash can.  A figure of 1 in 20 [published to binned] was quoted as typical. So you hoped your press release would be the fortunate 1 out of 20.

Then a couple of things gradually started to happen that changed things. Most b-2-b publications a few decades ago were monthly magazines, a few might have been sold by subscription but by and large it was display and classified advertising that paid for them. And the advertisers were often the same people that sent in the press releases. Colour print was not yet common in  b-2-b publications. A colour section was bound in  to the journal which was otherwise mainly black and white. There was obviously more appeal to place advertising in the colour pages of the publication. Likewise  a news item and photograph in colour were deemed more effective. This opened up a new revenue stream for the publisher. At the time colour print was significantly more expensive than black and white and one additional cost was the production of films for printing colour, which were known as 'colour separation's. The publishers would run your press release on one of the colour pages, but there would be a modest charge for the 'cost' of the separations. The once claimed editorial independence from the financial clout of the advertiser was breached. Now you could buy space one way or another. Advertorials - typically using the magazine's house style but containing apparently 'independently' written copy and therefore more authoritative - allowed the big advertisers to dominate the media. So before heading for the trash can, the press releases rejected by the editor would pass to a salesmen who would sell the space usually using the "colour separation' approach. When advertising sales slumped in difficult times the sales boys  were on the phone selling 'colour seps'- a term that outlived the actual process for colour print as b and w and colour prices balanced out and new generations of 'colour sep' salesmen, when challenged exhibited scant knowledge of what the charge was actually for.

With the Internet the advantage swung more in favour of the advertisers. Now all their news could be published - at least on their own website  -  giving a far more favourable return for the efforts put into writing the press release. Then along comes social media and another set of publication channels. All this opportunity to publish news brought with it its own problems. For example what is really news, news that customers or prospects would choose to read, because it is informative or interesting and what is common place?  Actually filling all these channels with interesting and informative content is another matter. Well here's another problem - the 'news feeds' on social media and Facebook's Instant Articles platform for example has kind of turned the tables a bit where the channel becomes the publisher and the initiative again shifts away from  the advertiser or news creator. Facebook, can and is changing the algorithm. An article titled, 'Why Facebook isn't working for publishers' takes a look at the evolving situation.

Although the technology has been around for years, few company web sites have used RSS as a news feed. It was and remains an in interesting option, one we look at in the next blog.

Talking about marketing metrics

Much importance is given to measuring the value of various marketing initiatives that are sometimes referred to as marketing metrics.

There is an interest, even a desire, to demonstrate the return on the investment put into marketing and it is handy to have a few Key Metrics to support this. These may be displayed on a 'dashboard' and  track the responses and value of a marketing campaign. For email campaigns we add an analytic tracking code enabling us to follow via the client's Google Analytics, the source of enquiry. So we can track who has opened the email, then clicked on a link to the sales offer on the html email and gone to the landing page and in due course placed an order we hope. Monetary values can be assigned to this based on knowing how much the campaign cost, the cost of each lead and the value of the resulting order should the visitor take this path. In practice it doesn't really tie up. It is a relay race from the email tracking handing over to the analytic tracking and ultimately the financial software. In theory we also know geographically where customers and prospects are located from their server's IP - but the buying office  and accounts people are often indifferent locations.

Of course it would be very nice to have this path from marketing initiative through to sales and shipping, so different campaigns could be compared.. But there are other influences at work. The customer may already be familiar with the brand from other advertising  and ordered because it seemed cheaper than the usual price.  Even in a relatively simple situation where customers respond to a promotion and inputs and outputs are measured often to an implied accuracy that does not really exist.  

And here is the core of the issue. Numbers can be expressed to several decimal points which sounds impressively accurate, but typically relies on data that not only lacks such precision, but can actually be very misleading. Take an example. When I  worked in the lighting industry, member companies submitted monthly sales returns by category of product, which the industry body compiled into a total figure for the different markets and product. The completed forms were returned showing our numbers, the total  market and by simple math to calculate market share as a percentage. It looked impressive that we had say 50.35% share of a market, but it was a total market only of the member companies, it excluded imports which in several categories were growing fast.

The end figures are only as good as the data that is entered and too often this is at best a guess. So the marketing metric needs to ne treated with caution.

Farewell to Francis Reid

With Andy Collier - Francis Reid (R)

Francis Reid, who died last month (9th June 2016), enjoyed a legendary reputation in the arcane  world of theatre lighting.

But not only was Francis the 'go to' person to ask about theatre lighting, his theatrical interests were much broader, with experience in many roles within the theatre, including running one. I had joined Strand from Thorn, the UK's largest lighting company, but none of my experience had taken me into Thorn's theatre lighting business. I  had however worked closely with Tony Isaacs and the team behind  Q File - a landmark product that had stolen a march on Strand the market leaders, in bring electronics to theatre lighting. I  was also told that in the sequence of recent Strand marketing managers I was unusual in having an engineering background and expertise in lighting. It was in this appointment I  first met Francis.

Some years earlier I  had, in an amateur role, attended a series of theatre lighting training sessions run on a Saturday morning in Strand's Covent Garden HQ. I was also aware of Francis' ability to communicate in other ways than the expression of his artistic abilities through his lighting designs. Also through his teaching and writing expertise similarly commanded respect. He taught us too, memorably, hands on' education at the Buxton Opera House in mid winter when the theatre was dark.

Despite his fame, Francis was so easy to talk to. Although our meetings were quite infrequent, we would sit and chat over a cup of coffee like long lost friends. Francis made you feel immediately comfortable and treated you as a valued friend. Unlike some, he did not use his position or reputation to take a superior role. When looking at new products, his questioning of how they worked was gentle and probing.  Not the attitude of others who try to undermine your new development. This all made his advice that much more valuable.

Francis had been one of the few editors of Strand's TABS magazine. By the time I  had taken over the marketing role at Strand, Richard Harris had taken up the editorial pen.

Time to bring back the export department

Before Britain joined what was to evolve into the EU, it was common for British companies to divide
the world into two main spheres. The Home market and the Export market.

The appointment of the new British Foreign Secretary - a job title that in itself reflects the division of the world into Home and Foreign affairs - has certainly sparked a lot of interest. What surprised me was the role is being filled by someone who actually speaks a number of languages other than English. In one major company I worked for an expertise in foreign languages was apparently not a requirement. In another company I  dealt with the export manager didn't even possess a passport! Turning the clock back still further, my father worked for a company that traded to all corners of the globe - English speaking corners that is - all in a pre-Internet, pre-international telephones era too, where the telegraph was the 'killer product" of communications.

The Home market was covered by a team of salesmen, branch managers, area mangers, regional managers - may be more. Export desks dealt with the Empire, later becoming the Commonwealth and handled through branch offices. Where I  worked we actually had a Europe desk, run by a man who could actually speak a few European languages, but also had a profound dislike of foreigners. Given this organisational structure it is surprising anyone ever imagined British membership of the EU was a good idea at anytime. Of course what actually happened is that big businesses became huge businesses and then global businesses in response to big political groupings like the EU. With an HQ in a low tax country like Luxembourg or Ireland  soon these huge global companies were paying less tax than the local shop keeper. Of course they wanted Britain to remain in the EU. But now the opportunity is there again for enterprising British companies to export to a global market again.

The Brief

Getting the brief right and complete first time can save a great deal of time, money and frustration. But of course it doesn't happen very often.

I find it always helps when the client's brief to the agency is part of an established strategy. And that is typically a Marketing Plan supported by a Corporate Identity manual and quite importantly by a budget. As a marketing agency we typically operate as part of the marketing team and will have had input to the top level marketing strategy and planning, be familiar with the CI,  aware of the budget and critically have a good understanding of the market. Perhaps because of this issue of market understanding, b-2-b agencies often tend to specialise in a specific market.

All this helps with providing a comprehensive design brief, but even then it is often the case that important elements of the project are missing. Back in the distant past when b-2-b businesses were starting to develop a web presence, this missing information was not just a photograph or some technical data, but the whole way the business operated. What we all too often discovered was that building a web site demanded a clarity of what, how and where the client company sold their wares. It showed up big gaps in areas such as spare parts and consumables, often revealing an informal arrangement where someone wandered into the stores and picked up parts to post to the end customer. It forced the client to have a fresh look at their product offering and how they did business. For some this review in itself resulted in more sales, often because the web site revealed options which before customers didn't know existed.

Agencies often find their role is towards the end of a project so where the project is behind schedule the marketing collateral appears to be late, or the agency time frame gets compressed. We find that being involved in the project from the outset can help later on when it is time to launch a new product and significant elements of the marketing campaign are likely to be missing this can be flagged up early and resource allocated accordingly.

A Time for Reflection

Andy Collier      3rd September 1953 - 12th July 2013

 Today we pause from the daily work to remember and reflect on the anniversary of the untimely death of Andy Collier.






































Today we pause from the daily work to remember and reflect on 

A new hope

As UK  voters opt for the EU exit, companies will need to take a new look at their marketing plans.

Although just 6% of UK businesses export products or services, removal of the protectionism of tariff walls and non-financial barriers to trade will create a more competitive market in the UK. Businesses that only trade in the UK should still be assessing their products, manufacturing costs and profitability to ensure they compete against a probable new wave of imports that now can enter the country duty free. One option is to evaluate not just against product cost, but also look at some form of arrangement with the manufacturers to represent their products in the UK and increase your market share. If the imported products can expand the product portfolio presented to the UK  market, may be the reverse will be true and there is an opportunity to sell your products back in return.  This is just one thing to look at to a] protect your local UK market, b] increase market share and c] find new markets for your products previously only sold to the UK  market.

The UK is also a net importer of goods from the EU and it is reasonable to assume that the producers in Germany, France, Italy, Spain and all the rest will continue to want to sell their products in the UK. The new arrangements will offer opportunities especially for the smaller companies in the EU to form partnerships at a business to business level. We once coined a phrase that businesses should 'Think Globally, Market Locally.' For small businesses [SMEs] setting up an operation in each, of say, the top 5 countries in the EU is an expensive thing to do. But partnering with an existing business immediately gives that 'local' presence. 

Generally speaking the benefits of an independent UK  should appeal more to SMEs than big companies. Big companies prefer dealing with other big organisations, they have company headquarters where it is most tax efficient, do deals with other big organisations, such as government, lobby Brussel's law makers, trade unions and minimise or eliminate  tax due. A UK partner company offer EU based business opportunities too and crucially an English speaking operation as a native language that is used so extensively in global business.

Rather than the gloom and doom prophecies of proponents of remaining in the EU, there is now a new hope. Or in the words attributed to an earlier advocate of a European political union - "Europe today, tomorrow the world."

EU - It's time to go

With just a few days until the EU Referendum, the main UK papers have now published their editorial positions, whether opting for 'In''or 'Out'. Last night in Milton Keynes the Prime Minister in the words of the Independent got "absolutely savaged". I  had applied to the BBC for a ticket to be part of that  TV audience which incidentally demanded a significant amount of personal detail on the application, but they didn't call. Denied the opportunity to contribute to the great debate via television, through the platform of this blog  I offer my reasons why Britain should leave the EU,


1. The EU - What is it and where is it heading - a free trade zone and customs union, or a super state?
The 'Remain' campaign's over arching reason for staying in the EU rests on the supposed economic  benefits of being a member of a single market of 28 countries with 5 million people. Leaving this vast market they say will lead to a recession, a big hole in the UK  budget, which will have to be filled by increased taxation and job losses. In short it is primarily for economic reasons the UK should remain within this tariff barrier. But the ambitions of the EU go way beyond selling British goods to the EU, and buying theirs in return.

The EU has a much loftier goal than creating  a simple customs union that the Remain campaign are banking on by frightening the electorate not to vote to leave at the peril of losing their jobs, lower pay, paying more for goods in general and paying more tax. In Brussels it is referred to as The European Project.  It is a long term project that its architects envisage driving towards a European superstate. Institutions, structures, laws and the trappings of a superstate are step by step being put in place. Most are already set up. The EU already has a parliament, a civil service, courts, a flag and a national anthem, but there are at least two big issues yet to be implemented. The EU is well aware that there is little popular support or interest in a superstate and crucially lacks a unifying common language. As more eastern states have joined, so have people with German as their mother tongue - 100 million of the total EU population of 500 million - has increased. Mrs Merkel's Christian Democratic Union  party has already proposed the working language of Europe should be German. And the other big issue? A German controlled European army!

When voting for remaining in the EU, it is not voting for some cosy business club set up to keep the rest of the world out and protecting inefficient EU producers  from global competition thanks to  tariff barriers, it is voting for a German dominated United States of Europe!

2. The European Project
Voting to remain in the EU is unlikely to be a vote to preserve the status quo - even the Remain speakers recognise it needs reform and argue that there is more chance of doing this within the organisation than outside. Unfortunately the British experience of reform actually goes to the sacred held tenets of EU faith. Free movement of labour being just one that is a current issue. The British have little or no appetite for a massive federal super state - especially a state that rules by directive. One that legislates for eventualities they may never occur or are not a problem. The British press has long taken great delight in lampooning directives that seek to specify the shape, size, colour etc of fruit and vegetables such as the legal curvature of a banana. During the second world war German officers handbooks on military matters included the authority to raise the left arm in ritualistic salute to the Fuhrer should the right have been lost in battle. And here is a serious problem - the British not only think this obsession with rules and regulations is authoritarian, but a huge joke. The laws that insisted vegetables and goods in general could not be sold by Imperial measures anymore which gave rise to the 'Metric Martyrs' and buying milk in 2.72 litre containers, yet still drinking pints of beer in the pub, buying petrol in litres but driving distances in miles. Despite 40 years or so of metrication, even people not born when it came in, still talk of their height in feet and inches, talk about 'going the extra mile' and drinking a pint or having the other half - the old measures were more related to human experience and are deeply entrenched in our language and culture . A cricket pitch at 22 yards, also known as a chain or in Euro speak 20.1168 meters would never have been proposed by a Eurocrat, but then again few European countries play cricket, none at world class. The British way is just different, so why on earth join the club in the first case? The British were never given the choice? We have long memories and now its payback time.


3. Towards European domination
The British have also had a soft spot for the little guy, especially when pitched against the odds. In football we applaud the little village team of tradesmen and shop keepers who knock an expensively assembled top league team out of the FA Cup. The outsider who has no chance against the professionals, men like 'Eddie the Eagle' who competed in a winter Olympics in ski jumping against the sporting elite of the ski world. Even more so that he wore pebble lens glasses and looked gawky and awkward, but we cheered on the audacity and sheer nerve to even compete. He didn't get anywhere near the winners rostrum, but we still remember him, long after all the famous names have been forgotten. It is not just in sport where we like people and teams who defy the odds, but on he field of battle too. Shakespeare's Henry V captures the mood with 20,000 well equipped French lined up against a tired, sick and depleted English force out numbered more than 3 to one. And yet despite  the superiority of men and armour Agincourt was a famous English victory over the French. Centuries later it was another  English army in retreat at Dunkirk. France had fallen to the armoured might of the German  Panzer tanks and Stukah dive bombers and with the British Expeditionary Force pushed back to the Channel coast the British were the next on Hitler's 'European Tour. In later years some clothing vendor came up with a commemorative T-Shirt based on the style popular for a while celebrating a major pop tour with the dates and venues of the gigs. The "Adolph Hitler  European Tour 1939 -1945."It listed the countries invaded - September 1939 - Poland, April 1940 -Norway, May 1940 - Luxembourg, May 1940 - Belgium, May 1940 - France, September 1940 - England Cancelled, April 1941 - Yugoslavia, May 1941 - Greece, June 1941 - Crete, August 1942 - Russia. Cancelled, July 1945 - The Bunker, Berlin. After Dunkirk Churchill made his famous, "We shall fight them on the beaches .. speech to the House of Commons. In 1942 Hitler had a report prepared by a committee of bankers and academics- Europaische Wirtschafts Gemeinschaft – which translates to European Economic Community [EEC] for the post war administration of Europe which he believed Germany would win. There were many echoes of this document in the Treaty of Rome in 1945.

4. EU - The democratic deficit 
One serious flaw with today's EU is that the directives are not initiated by elected parliamentary representatives, but emanate from unelected bureaucrats. People not in the public eye and not accountable to the people they effectively rule. Those MEPs who are elected have no power to stop or initiate directives. They merely a fake parliament to give an impression of democracy. The voter turnout is very low at Euro elections and in Britain UKIP has the biggest elected group of MEPs.


5. The EU - Does it work?
Finally does this expensive, slow moving, wasteful, corrupt and dictatorial organisation work? There is some dispute as to whether the books have been signed off in the last 20 years. Unlike commercial organisations an EU funded Court of Auditors checks the accounts and has reported on wasteful use of funds by recipient countries and cases of fraud.

It is on the slide as the share of world trade continue's to decline.

It has no idea what to do about the millions of refugees entering its borders.

The euro has caused great austerity to countries like Greece.

It is not democratic - the bureaucrats are not elected or electable.

It is outdated, inward looking, stifles enterprise and inefficient ...

...... it is time to say goodbye.

EU - In or Out - what is best for business?

The referendum campaigning shifted ground last week to focus on whether membership or independence was best for business. And associated with this the question of immigration - is that beneficial or a drain on the economy?

The 'Remain' side had focussed strongly on the economy until then which they maintained would be in better shape by remaining in the EU with free movement of people an essential requirement for having enough people in the work force. The 'Leave' side had suggested that the EU and its fondness for masses of new legislation year after year was itself an impediment to business success, not to the global business so much as to the 99% of  the rest - the small and medium size companies who mainly traded in the UK.

Another argument sometimes brought up to illustrate the good works of the EU is that the continent has been kept  at peace for the last half century. Well if you ignore the Balkans,  Ukraine,   terrorist campaigns and European expeditionary wars in the Middle East, Africa, the South Atlantic etc, western Europe has not experienced anything on the scale of the two world wars of the 20th Century. It might be more realistic to recognised the key role of NATO - The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and in particular the major participation of the USA. Looking to the USA has been more the traditional role of Britain which has for centuries looked across the oceans for business and the USA is Britain's biggest export market. But if the EU  has been so successful in maintaining the peace, give or take local and regional problems, why  does Europe need its own army and why is this not being announced until after the referendum?

Why does the EU need an army when NATO already exists to provide security in the area? Who, what or where is the enemy against which the army will be deployed should the worse happen? A lot of questions at a time when the attacks are homeland terrorism requiring different response than a modern mechanised army. The French military seem alarmed at the plans for a Euro army and there are  reports of  Germany being secretly engaged on such a purpose. Of course this will not be admitted true or not, but this is exactly what happened after the first world war as warships, armour and air power were secretly built up. My parents generation lived through the results of this and the older generation instinctively still harbours concerns, so not surprising the older voters are showing the greatest tendency to leave the EU  before it is too late. Out of respect for the generation that gave so much to free European countries to regain their sovereignty and to ensure Britain remained free a vote to leave is  obvious choice. Hitler had a vision for Europe, for a few years in the early 1940s Germany ruled the continent. The EU has drawn up familiar sounding plans in their vision for Europe all the more disturbing  when the voters have scant knowledge of who is operating the levers of power. And what's more we can't vote them out of office. Controlling fishing and agriculture, determining the size of carrots and straightness of bananas is one thing. Controlling a Euro army is a chilling prospect.

The EU - a single market or 28 individual country markets?

I  have dealt with a number of companies during several decades in marketing and consultancy and observed how they variously trade with other countries.

The main thrust of the 'Remain' campaign in the upcoming referendum on EU  membership seems to increasingly rest on the assertion for the UK  economy flourishing within the EU or with all sorts of upheaval and disaster predicted should the UK quit the EU. Even Government statistics show that despite expanding in membership, the EU continues to lose share of global GDP falling from 30% in 1993 to 24% in 2013. What's more the proportion of UK trade with the EU has fallen consistently since 1999, while trade with non-EU countries is growing.

So what about this famous single market of 500 million customers that we will somehow be excluded from selling to? But what about the quality of these millions of customers. Are they in fact even customers or prospects at all. If the single market is so essential why are countries like Greece all but broke? Why if it makes goods cheaper do the British pay more for cars, many food items, travel and loads more? The truth is that there are not 28 countries waiting to buy British goods, but probably only a few and of these only Germany that is a serious world player. The rest range from former USSR occupied countries, basket case economies and over regulated inefficient old fashioned economies. The reason the EU bag of all sorts is destined to fail is the rest of the world is surging ahead.

Does the UK want to stay on a sinking ship or take to the life boats?

Lets consider three broad categories of companies operating in the UK:

1. Country divisions of major global companies.
2. UK based companies that export products or services.
3. UK companies that do not export at all.

The global companies tend to divide up the world into huge areas and Europe is not generally one of them but tucked in with the Middle East and Africa. American companies I  have been involved with are surprised that Europe is not one place but a collection of countries of varying size, varying customs and their own languages! One American boss I  reported to would phone late at night from his west coast office to tell me he was coming to Europe. Oh where? Europe! One major German electrical company I dealt with used English as its company language. Outposts of the corporate empire find their marketing dictated from a head office in America or Japan. Inter company transfer prices become more important than market prices and where goods originate or are invoiced employs the time of plenty of book keepers.

For the UK based companies who have some export business there are not many countries in Europe they usually need to bother about. Traditional markets such as America and Canada, the former British colonies, the Middle East, Far East and Australia and New Zealand often use British Standards, speak English and like British products. As for Europe, Germany, France, Scandinavia, Benelux, Italy and possibly Spain and Portugal  are enough to take on.

The last group, which in terms of numbers of companies is large, are small businesses, often local and for them the EU is just a source of unwanted rules, regulations and red tape.

 

Fortress Europe or global free trade? In or out?

Not long to the UK Referendum to remain in the EU or leave. Our essay looks at the back story.

Whichever route the voters choose could have an impact on marketing along with a lot of other things. In recent blogs we have looked at some key issues such as product specifications with regard to standards compliance, price models from inside or outside tariff barriers and what customers actually want from your product.

This blog takes a quick look at why Britain is often at odds with the EU and why our history and culture has taken us down another path. So are the politicians trying to fit a square peg into a round hole? Is Britain suited to the rather different aims and ambitions and attitudes of our continental neighbours in Europe, or should Britain return to what has worked so well in the past?

The UK is the world's 9th largest exporting economy  with the top destinations for UK  exports being, the USA ($51 billion), Germany ($46.5b), The Netherlands ($34.2b), Switzerland ($33.6 b) and France ($27 b). Interestingly the USA  is not a member of the EU  single market and the UK  does not have a trade agreement with the USA either.  Switzerland is not in the EU either  but ranks highly in global indexes of top performing economies, especially in terms of freedom and economic innovation. Arguably the Netherlands is over stated due to the way the EU counts goods forwarded via Rotterdam port as exports from the UK and other European countries, whereas much is exported to the rest of the world. So although  the 'in' or 'out' decision might cause some re-arrangements of how the UK trades with other countries,  it unlikely to result in the total disaster the campaigners predict. The UK is 3rd biggest of Germany's export markets, selling more than twice as much to us as we sell to them. Not surprisingly Germany, France and the UK  are not only the EU's biggest economies, but the paymasters for the other 25 EU countries too. The EU's importance to UK trade is in decline and shrinking all the time, from 55% in 1999 to 44% last year and allowing for the Rotterdam figures probably under 40% and according to some studies less than before Britain joined in 1973.

Worryingly we see signs of civil unrest in both Germany, protesting about immigration and in France, protesting about some modest changes to labour laws. The violent street protests are disturbing to us, because by and large this is not the British way. The real issue for Europe now, is not how the UK will survive outside the EU, or more likely prosper, but what happens to the EU itself? And what if voters in Germany and France call a halt to supporting the rest of the member states and choose to exit as well? Without doubt there remain big cultural differences between our island race and the continentals. Britain's long existence as a maritime nation put us on a different path centuries ago. A direction that  promoted freedom, empowered merchant adventurers and the founding of colonies where trade followed the flag. By 1922 the 'Empire on which the sun never sets' ruled over one fifth of the world's population at that time and controlled around a quarter of the earth's total land mass. Although the Empire was largely dismantled by peaceful transition to local populations, the British had created and left a viable infra structure that included a democratic form of government, a professional civil service, legal systems, cities,  railways and ports and established English as the global language of business, not just in the legacy Commonwealth nations, but globally.

While Britain looked outwards to the world where trade flourished, the continent was going through often turbulent times. In England enterprising innovators and entrepreneurs had created the Industrial Revolution [between 1760 to 1840] which provided new forms of employment and churned out mass produced products to sell to a global, English speaking world. While England developed industry and trade, France embarked on bloody revolution, leading eventually to Napoleon and a military bid for domination of the continent. Dismissing the English as 'a nation of shop keepers', his ill fated bid for domination of the continent was to lead to his Waterloo. An ambition to somehow recreate the Holy Roman Empire was also taken up by the Kaiser and Hitler in due course. Britain largely took the line of helping maintain the balance of power on the continent, leaving Britain to rule and influence the rest of the world. The two world wars of the 20th Century seriously damaged both British and European economies, rebuilt with significant aid to Europe by the Americans after WW2. Britain too needed help to rebuild with much of its infra structure worn out from 6 intensive years of global war but the socialist government made things worse - even requiring food rationing. For the British people WW2  might have ended the long pre-war economic slump of the 1930's, the war itself and then the austerity of the early 1950's. With the 1960's came the dismantling of the British Empire.  Meanwhile  Germany boosted by Marshall Aid and with a new open approach to freedom and enterprise was enjoying an 'economic miracle'. The Suez Campaign of 1956 was a low point with Britain forced to concede to the American super power it had now become. The EEC suddenly began to look more interesting as a counter to the USA and USSR super powers, a replacement for the Empire and to hope some of the German economic miracle might rebuild Britain too.

At that time it was still rare for the average British citizen to travel to what was still known as the continent. Office worker and labourer alike opted for either a brash seaside resort such as Blackpool or the genteel pleasures of Eastbourne. Foreigners started across the English Channel, their water was apparently undrinkable, there were toilets in the streets and worst of all they spoke funny. General De Gaulle was the highest ranking French officer to escape the German invasion of France in May 1940 and while in London, Churchill kind of invented him and his trademark pillbox cap straight out of the Foreign Legion, as the Leader of the Free French, quite an elevation for a tank commander. But it was De Gaulle who went on to become President of France and in that role vetoed the British application to join the Common Market. His short tenure in London had given him sufficient insight into the British way of things to figure membership would not sit easily with the continental countries. The British who had ventured abroad were more likely to be on tour with a British Expeditionary Force to participate in the latest continental war. A war that gave rise to the term - 'Dunkirk Spirit'. So what's that all about then? Well, in the dark days of May to June 1940 the remnants of the once best equipped ever British Expeditionary Force was in retreat via the otherwise unremarkable channel port of Dunkirk. Most of the British Army and some French over 338,226 in all, were somehow spirited away by a flotilla of Navy vessels and best of all pleasure boats and cabin cruisers from the River Thames! All the while German Stuka dive bombers attacked and trashed Dunkirk. What was a massive defeat was somehow turned into victory by the British news services, survivors were welcomed home as heroes. And in almost the darkest hour the average Briton celebrated, not just the deliverance of our men, but the exit of the French from WW2.That was the origin of the 'Dunkirk Spirit.'



By the 1950's and into the 60's and 70's  trade unions run by old communists paralysed British industry with wave after wave of strikes, low productivity, under investment, over staffing and general industrial malaise. Eventually Ted Heath the UK  negotiator who carried on negotiating when everyone else had lost interest, signed the UK up to the Common Market. Stripped of major natural assets  such as the fish rich North Sea [oil and gas too it turned out later] , compelled to support inefficient European farmers, to introduce decimal money and adopt a huge raft of largely needless legislation it soon became apparent that this was a club we should never have joined. But around this time, cheap package holidays to Spain began to replace the dubious delights of Blackpool in August for the typical British worker. Cheap booze and fags, all day and all night drinking and better still - sunshine - proved more of a lure than the decaying former grandness of Britain's victorian resorts. Even better you could get a British Visitors Passport from the Post Office for a mere seven shillings and sixpence and collect 200 fags and a couple of bottles of spirits as you passed 'go' in the duty free shops. The Spanish resorts quickly adapted to the British preference for all day fried breakfasts, tea like mother makes and four ale bars. Sod the piers and Punch and Judy and the half built hotels when you could get drunk and sun burned for a few a Pesatas.

But by the time Margaret Thatcher swept into power, Britain had become the 'basket case' of Europe. Being members of what was becoming the EU, or European Project seemed to have done nothing to improve the decline. It took another war, this time in the remote Falkland Islands miles away in the South Atlantic which had been invaded by another soldier in fancy uniform, this time an Argentine. On the back of this offshore and even unlikely military success, the unions were taken on and defeated on the home front, lack lustre state businesses were privatised, restrictions were swept away, the economy turned round and the 'Iron Lady' turned her sights next on Brussels and the bureaucratic EU. She simply banged her handbag on a desk and demanded 'her money back' - well the British people's actually. It was probably the last good deal anyone from Britain ever did.

This month the voters decide on Europe

The referendum campaign is hotting up as the June 23 date looms large and so far  probably the only issue that many people agree upon, is it could be 'the biggest decision' voters will be asked to take. Well, this year anyway.

But is that really true? As with much of the campaign so far neither side can say what will actually happen should the British voters opt to leave the EU, because so far nobody has. Left the EU that is.

The campaign to stay in the EU is led by the prime minister, along with most of the opposition parties, big business, big trade unions, an impressive line up of 'important' or 'famous' people and beneficiaries of public funding in general. It is supported by the unelected EU  bureaucrats, the EU presidents - yes there are several of them - the President of America, the leaders of the G7 countries and backed by plenty of EU funding.

The 'Leave' campaign - the official one that gets some government cash to spend on the campaign - appears to be led by former London Mayor and Member of Parliament, Boris Johnson who is a likely challenger for David Cameron's day job as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party when this is all over. So the outcome might be winner takes all. The other main advocates of leaving the EU are the UK Independence Party - UKIP - whose main purpose, or raison d'être as our French friends might say, is to quit the EU. UKIP paradoxically are the biggest group of UK MPs in the European Parliament. Or  'mock' parliament as it has no powers to sponsor, promote or reject laws. UKIP head up some rag tag coalition of groups and individuals who just don't want anything to do with Europe.

Helpfully, well may be, into this arena The  Electoral Commission has issued a small leaflet explaining the whole election process and  offering a summary of the  'Vote Remain' and 'Vote Leave' key points.

The 'lets stay in side 'stands accused of what the British press call 'Project Fear'- in short bombarding the electorate with a whole catalogue of disasters that will be visited on Britain like some biblical plague of frogs if they dare to vote to leave. The three key issues for them are:

• Stronger - a larger economy, stronger leadership on the world stage and getting more out than we put in.
• Safer - by fighting cross border crime, tackling terrorism and climate change.
• Better off - more jobs with 3 million linked to EU trade, lower prices for families and more trade for business.

The 'lets leave and govern ourselves' side's arguments are summed up as:-

• EU law controls UK migration policy - more than a quarter of a million people came into the UK in the last 12 months, enough to fill a city the size of Newcastle.
• The EU  is growing - 9 members when we joined and its 28 now with 5 more to come.
• We pay £350 million a week to the EU budget - thats a lot of money!

The headline issues of the stay side - Stronger, Safer, Better Off - are in themselves hardly contentious aspirations, but associated with the EU need some justification as to the relevance of the EU in such achievements. Clearly the British economy has been stronger in the past and nothing to do with the EU and 'we get more out than we put in is demonstrably false' - even the EU acknowledges Britain is one of the net contributors. Safer links crime across borders, tackling terrorism and climate change. Cross border crime is undoubtably more of an issue due to the EU's obsession with free movement across borders. What role does the EU have in tackling terrorism that is not the role of national governments already and genuine international co-operation such as Interpol? And 'climate change' - even its believers don't claim safety as the main issue. It is worth adding that it is the American supported NATO  that has kept the peace in Europe since the end of World War 2. The 3 million jobs is based on a 15 year old review and prices have gone up in the EU - don't believe it, then check against American prices.

Now view Europe - the movie

Is the european business model obsolete?

With the UK Referendum less than a month away just what does the EU  actually deliver for England?

Take a look at this documentary that asks the relevant questions.

Europe - the movie

The use of a motion picture to tell a story  was one of the most compelling methods of communication developed during the 20th century.

But it wasn't just Disney that utilised the evolving communication opportunity to engage with cinema audiences. Politicians recognised the potential of the movies to appeal to voters in a more subtle way than advertising via posters and billboards could. Advertising needs to focus  on a single idea, communicated via a clever headline, and/or an arresting image and be associated with the branding of the political party.   The written word, a sound radio broadcast and movies provided the voters with the rationale, the back story and validation of the 'call to action' to vote. In the politicians' hands the movie became propaganda and none more versed in the black arts than Dr Joseph Goebbels who in 1933 was appointed Germany's Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. Within 3 years of his appointment his ministry was financing three quarters of all German feature films and in due course, via censorship and legislation soon controlled the film industry along with radio and theatre. The 'golden age' of cinema was during the 1940s for the British public, but as television grew in popularity during the 1950s cinema audiences declined just as cinema had previously sounded the death knell of the music hall.

Today the Internet is making inroads through sites such a YouTube and in the British Referendum debate the campaigners are using the medium to present the complex issues that will be decided in a months time by a single vote - to go or to stay.

Check out the inormational film - Brexit the Movie.

Is print finally on the way out?

Two different issues over the last few weeks, but both are bad news for print.

The first issue is the demise of the Polestar Group when the last financing arrangement failed and in came the administrators. I suspect the Polestar brand is not well know beyond the print industry. Their web site proclaims, "We realise your Vision" - it goes on to say, "As Europe's largest independent printers fused with a mission to be the leading content delivery company we realise your vision too" - you can read the rest. The Vision Statement thing was essential to any major business that wanted to be taken seriously, but that was perhaps a passing management speak idea back in the 1980s. Actually Polestar was one of our clients for many years, until about 3 years ago. At that time they more modestly claimed to be Europe's largest independent printer. How that has morphed into aiming to become Europe's leading content delivery company is interesting. The funny thing is Polestar used us to deliver their press releases. At the time like many companies their IT department controlled the web site and frequently posting press releases  did not really work for the PR Officer. We presented our Virtual News Office and the deal was done. At that time the situation was reversed - they developed the content, we delivered it. Polestar seems to have an equally intriguing past, older readers may recall Robert Maxwell's various  print groups which were the prequel to Polestar before the name was changed and no doubt provided rich content for its own printing presses to deliver. The company seemed to be positioned at the industrial end of the market, investing heavily in new plant and a fabulous new print factory in Sheffield. The press releases we delivered painted an optimistic future for print.  But in an over capacity industry where price deflation has seen other players drop out, maybe the maths didn't work for the bold investment hopes.

The second comment is the rise of the electronic book and in particular the Kindle. Not long ago we travelled with 30 Kg of luggage or more and packing a few paper backs to read along the way was easily accommodated. But low cost fares and high cost baggage conveyance changed the whole packing philosophy. With just a modest carry-on case, volume is now a big issue, particularly when you think about all the electric kit and collection of cables and chargers needed to support them that has to go along too. A few chunky best sellers just don't make it to the packed suitcase anymore. And who wants to carry around a read book? Once completed they are just consumers of space and weight. The Kindle consumes very little space, although as a long time Apple user, the page turning can be confusing, it is great for travelling. And it solves another problem. What to do with read books? The bookcase is no longer the show place it was to demonstrate to guests you could read, even the charity stores are choosy about the books you give them. So the book in its printed form is on the skids too.

It may just be that the crafters of mission statements embodying ambitions to become leaders in content delivery have got it the wrong way round. It is the content that enjoys the value.

New generation of entrepreneurs optimistic for UK business

Entrepreneur in Saigon

A recent survey revealed that 80 per cent of new entrepreneurial start ups are optimistic about the future for small businesses in the  UK.

What's more, 90% rate Britain a good place to start a new business and are confident about the future unfazed by the possibility of a British exit from the EU. Interestingly, comments made on this report see the EU as more relevant to big business than to small business.

Lets face it big business seems to have been associated with more innovative accountancy than innovative products. The bad press generated by huge global brands in large scale tax avoidance is rightly condemned by SMEs who pay their corporation tax. The EU seems a natural partner for big business, big organised labour and big government. Not only is the EU's  tariff block an outdated concept, but a business model that serves to isolate member states from the world outside. A world  that has already left the failing EU model trailing behind. While big business is happy for the EU to create barriers to protect a bunch of near bankrupt nations, SMEs and startups are saddled with the increasing burden of EU generated legislation. and costs.

So why do SMEs not do more business in the EU? As a small enterprise we had several clients for our marketing services in Europe. Why the past tense? Put simply, for us trading with the EU was just not worth the trouble. We have now pulled out of dealing with EU  clients. When it comes to the referendum vote, it is the individual citizens who will have a say and 5.2 million of them are small business owners.

A view from within the EU

The British referendum is not a day-to-day topic of conversation here in EU land. So far the only comments have been from the British ex pat community online news feeds and that mainly a concern about their residential status should Britain vote to quit.

In this outpost of the EU empire there are sizeable populations of British, German and Italian residents. To some degree the British and more recent arrivals, the Italians, have favoured the northern parts of this Spanish island territory while the Germans have opted for the south. No problems with beach towels reserving sun loungers here then. The British newspapers are essentially the same as in the UK, while the BBC  online news assumes a more global scope. As far as the media goes the main interest of residents is how to get British TV for free. Various entrepreneurs have created a niche business in supplying 'electronic boxes' that they claim offers access to a vast range of content. It is a subject that has concerned many residents going by the chat, including occasional references to a character known as 'Dodgy Dave'. Of course you can sit in a sports bar as we did surrounded by tattoo inked fellow countrymen, to watch the disappointing exit of Watford from the FA cup.


Marketing here is largely 'word of mouth', via printed news sheets and online. The news magazines opt for a few stories re told in several languages and with a high content of display advertising.
'The Daily News' modestly claims to be the 'Island's biggest English language newspaper online'. Today's lead story says it all - 'German couple drown off the west coast.'

Will Britexit help SMEs?

With big business mainly aligned with the government, together with most political parties and trade unions, the campaign to remain in the EU  has plenty of funding and backing to win the upcoming UK referendum. But what about the SME's who are expected to provide the growth needed for more jobs?

Government statistics show that 99.9% in 2015 were SME's providing  60% of all private sector employment in the UK. So an important sector of the UK economy then - where do these businesses stand? This week I spoke at length to a businessman who runs a medium size business which provides major plant hire to the construction industry. He and his business partner were strongly in favour of leaving the EU even though he thought there could be an economic downturn for a while, but a Britain once again free of the burden of EU legislation would soon re-focus and within a few years be booming. His views of an independent Britain were generally optimistic, as with others of the older generation, who tend to view Europe as more of a 'basket case' than the blueprint for a better future.

The Government pro EU campaign claims 'over 3 million jobs are linked to exports to the EU.' This statement in the now infamous £9 million leaflet leaves the suggestion that if the UK leaves, 3 million people will lose their jobs. How this figure was reached who knows. It is a fear of job losses that may influence individual voters.

In summary much of the Government's economic and business case to remain in the EU is to offer a gloomy alternative. Against this the optimism of the business owners in the vital SME camp is coming from people who have succeeded in building successful businesses and see independence as a great opportunity. An opportunity and positive spirit that needs to be eloquently argued if the referendum is to be won by the 'leave' campaigners.