Well, the winners are the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities- and the presentation was awesome. Fluid, insightful, positive and had some great ideas: like a custom printed bottle- photo booth style, and some great online unification of the site. They even suggested less Flash, no avatars and getting a less fragmented face on the site.
It was refreshing to see a really good team, present a great concept.
I went to the judges briefing afterwards- got some more insight. I’ll post more later.
In the meantime- all the students who participated gave Coke an amazing return on their sponsorship investment- NSAC may be the best bang for a marketers buck ever.
Only one thing to be careful about- just before Minnesota gave their winning pitch, it was announced that AOL was next years client. In their presentation Minnesota gave AOL as an example of how not to try to force consumers to do things their way- which got a huge chuckle and applause from the audience. Good luck getting out of that hole for next year Minnesota.
I attended the conference and thought the students did an amazing job as well…except one point. The target audience was multicultural youth. There was nothing multicultural in their research, consumer insight or execution. With the dominance of Hispanic and African American youth consuming the product and influencing pop culture (vs. the Beatles which was the music list example used)I don’t think a real focus group of multicultural youth would connect with the ads in any meaningful way. The students didn’t do any research on the target at all and it was ok with everyone. I am concerned about the future of the advertising industry that thinks, contrary to all of the data out there now, that black and Latino youth are not passionate about their culture.
While I only saw 4 of the 18 or 19 presentations- I did catch a common line from the ones I heard: this new generation doesn’t see color or culture as clearly as older people like us. They identify with their age group- and know when they are being pandered to.
A recurring theme was that instead of spending money on advertising- they would rather see Coca-cola making a difference through “cause marketing.”
While I do believe that black and Latino youth are passionate about their culture- they still see Coca-Cola as a company that wants to sell them sugar water- not some benevolent friend.
Advertising as we know it, may not have a future at all- and, if you listened to one of the AOL bigwigs at the conference- all he cares about is milking the current system until his retirement.
I think the winning presentation really stressed David’s point. There was a quote in Minnesota’s plans book that said something about how a teenager in one country has more in common with a teenager on the other side of the world than he does with his own parents. Plus, Minnesota did research at Uno, a Minneapolis-based Hispanic marketing agency. They also had information in their plans book about interviews they conducted with MTV and how, as David said, young people define themselves and relate to each other primarily by their youth, not by their culture.
Coca-Cola’s brand image isn’t about segmenting people based on their culture or race. It’s about bringing people TOGETHER–the name of Minnesota’s campaign. Not bringing them to the white majority, just bringing them together, as seen in the winning commercials (which I believe any teenager could relate to, regardless of race). Minnesota’s idea for cause marketing was also right on. By having Coke sponsor Tolerance Centers, the campaign stresses bringing together people of different cultures and backgrounds and embracing those differences.