I am always excited to see when a new brand comes along that uses technology in a way no one else has thought of yet. About a month ago Gern told me about ChaCha and I have been hooked ever since. “ChaCha is a revolutionary new free mobile answers service for people on the go. ChaCha works with virtually every provider and allows people with any mobile phone device with normal SMS and voice capability – from basic flip phones to advanced smart phones – to ask any question in conversational English and receive an accurate answer as a text message in just a few minutes. With ChaCha, answers are available when you need them… anytime, anywhere.” Basically you text message your question to 242-242 and within a few minutes a ChaCha guide will research your question from their computer and text you back an answer. It is such a simple idea that combines 2 of the most used technologies of the past few years, internet search engines and text messages, and creates a unique experience for the user. Now you don’t have to be in front of a computer to find out where the world’s largest peanut is. Next time you are away from your computer and have a quick question try it out, be warned though it is very addicting.

I saw a commercial for SC Johnson. The commercial was a story about how one of their factories is powered by a landfill close by. Basically the methane gas emitted by the landfill is recycled to power the machinery that makes a variety of household cleaners like Windex. At the end of the commercial, the CEO told me that every time I buy Windex I can feel good about myself. Thats what being “green” is all about I suppose. Nowadays we want our brands to have a conscience, just like us.

Last week Matchstic had a very humbling, but educational, experience. We lost a potential project and it wasn’t easy to swallow, but I learned a ton from it.

I learned that there is no such thing as over communication and that crystal clear clarity is a remarkable trait. It is easy to get neck deep in the norm of common practice terms (like hybrid, SEO, logotype, and comps) and toss them around like paper wads heading for the can, but what do those words look like to rookies in our world (i.e.- new clients)? Regardless, at the end of the day the responsibility lies on our shoulders to hold their hands and set expectations. The burden is on us to ensure they have crystal clear clarity.

Crystal clear clarity is much more than just understanding the proposal or grasping the conversation, it is several reminders, several conversations, several examples, and several emails. It is “beyond the shadow of a doubt“. It is border line annoying. It is so concrete that it never strays. It is little reminders here and there to keep the path straight and narrow. It is crystal clear clarity.

It was a valuable lesson, and in a way, I’m glad it happened. Next time though I’d just prefer to read a good blog article about it

The Law of Color

Chapter 17 of The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding

This is another chapter on simple aesthetics of a brand, and possibly the most easily deceptive choices you could make. There are 5 basic colors; red, orange, yellow, green and blue plus the neutrals of black, white and gray. Interestingly, colors are not created equally. Colors on the red end of the spectrum are focused slightly behind the retina making those colors feel as if they are moving toward you. Blue colors are focused slightly in front of the retina, appearing to move away from you. That is why red is the color of energy and excitement, while blue is the opposite, peaceful and tranquil.

Other colors have been given attributes over time:

White | Purity
Black | Luxury
Blue | Leadership
Purple | Royalty
Green | Environment and Health

Picking a color for a brand should focus on the mood, positioning within your market (leaders will have the first choice) and opposing your major competitors(Kodak is yellow, so Fuji is green).

What I learned: The conistancy brought on by long term use of a color will help to burn its way into the mind. Just think about Caterpillar, UPS, Coca Cola and the jacket for the Masters golf tournament.

_gern

Halloween is a day that you are always on the edge of your seat waiting for something crazy to happen. October 31, 2007 was certainly a spooky day at 797 Moreland Ave, aka Matchstic headquarters.

While we were eagerly working to send out a mass email promoting our third annual Carv-o-rama pumpkin carving contest, we were promptly stopped in our tracks when a car drove into our front yard, through a telephone pole and into our mailbox (though amazingly the mailbox was in no way damaged – that may just be the spookiest part). Thankfully there were only minor injuries for all parties involved.

There was a loud bang, the house shook and we immediately lost all power, phone lines, and internet lines. Our phone company SpeakEasy helped us get through the ordeal quickly and without too much pain.

A PR firm recently got hold of the story via SpeakEasy and sent it Inc. Magazine’s way. They seemed to think it was pretty crazy too! Check it out in the latest edition of Inc. Mag – page 33. You can also check out the article here.

UPDATE: check out photos of the event here.  Thanks for the link Blake!

That guy over to the left wants you to eat some chicken. I know what you are thinking I don’t know who that guy is and I definitely don’t want to do anything he tells me. That was my thoughts exactly when I first saw him on a commercial for Zaxby’s talking about how much he loves their chicken and other food. As the commercial progressed he kept talking about how great Zaxby’s food is and how everyone should love it. Sounds straightforward enough just another “regular” guy talking about his favorite restaurant and making a recommendation to you the viewer to go and eat at Zaxby’s, until the end when he say’s “I’m Lorenzo Lamas and I’m an actor.” Sounds ridiculous I know. Why would Zaxby’s pay a “famous” person to be a spokesperson when the whole time I thought it was just some regular guy talking about chicken? I don’t know the answer to the question, but Zaxby’s is taking the idea of c-list celebrities and past their prime actors and using them as spokespeople. Their “star” studded list includes, Cody Linley, Laurie Hickson-Smith, Alyson Stoner, Richard Thomas, and Reginald Veljohnson. Only time will tell if these commercials are working and if Renegade or Carl Winslow really makes you want to eat some chicken, but either way I wouldn’t want my brand associated with such marginal celebrities and past their prime actors.

I learned a valuable lesson two weeks reading a fresh, hot of the presses, copy of HOW Magazine. That lesson was simple, “You’ve got to get while the gettin’ is good.” ( I think that was a Conway Twitty song, not sure.)

I was skimming through the table of contents when an article caught my eye. It was a feature about Illustrator Linzie Hunter and how she turned her “Spam email folder into gold”. This bold brit took the raw hilariousness of broken English spam emails and created brilliant illustrations (like the one to the left). Clever idea. Funny part about it is- I’ve been working on that exact thing!

Since August 2007, I’ve been collecting Spam Emails for a book idea I’ve had (I have over 209 currently). The book would feature witty snippets from the emails turned into beautiful and hilarious works of art. My vision was for it to be a fun coffee table book that would make you chuckle and smile at the same time. The ultimate goal would have been to get it into a novelty circuit like Urban Outfitters.

Well, I’ve learned my lesson. If you have an idea, and you really believe in it, time is money! What are you waiting for?

You’ve got to get while the gettin’ is good.

Yes its the final chapter my loyal fans.
Im sure you all  have been wondering how it would end. Well here we go…

All Together says “to hell with what you think would work.” Its about universality. Its about the end of superiority. If Tabasco sauce wants to start selling a soy sauce, so be it. If Reebok wants to sell a shoe that smells like flavors of Kool-Aid, why not.

My thought on this would be that its risky. It doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. The traditional branding playbook would say ideas like this work in the short run but not in the long run. Over time they only cheapen what made them great.

it is easy to take people’s or company’s statements for granted. not really trust that what they are saying is important, or just disregarding it as the same thing that everyone else does.

i recently switched from Kellogg’s Raisin Bran to the Kroger Raisin Bran. as long as i can remember “two scoops of raisin” being apart of my morning. and it got me thinking, “well doesn’t everybody else use two scoops”, and “yeah, but how big are these scoops”, and even just “good for you Kelloggs.” but it turns out that two scoops is a lot of raisins. after 4 bowls of cereal of the kroger generic stuff… i have had only one raisin. just one.

this stuff needs to be called “just bran.”

two thoughts:

- maybe the two scoops slogan should be made stronger to say something like, “way more raisins than anybody else”

- or maybe a huge well known brand with one of the most generic names will continue to loose people to the cheaper generic brand of the same name.

(but keep in mind that the next time i buy Raisin Bran… it will be Kellogg’s Brand.)

yetty

Law 16 of The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding.

This was an interesting chapter that reaches into the design realm. After reading it I was left without a definite idea of what I thought about the chapter, and therefore want to just talk about what was said, what I think and questions I have as well.

To begin with, there was a specific shape, proportions even, given to which the human eyes react to the best. Since our eyes are mounted side by side the best ideal shape for a logotype would roughly be two and a quarter units wide and one unit high. I have no scientific knowledge about this, but it makes sense, but doesn’t rule out other shapes and proportions. The Golden Section doesn’t fit the proportions stated, and its the most commonly occuring proportion system in the universe. My thoughts; a pretty good rule of thumb, but nothing set in stone.

Of equal importance is the typeface choice. I’ll whole heartedly agree with this thought. In a world with 999,999 (give or take a few) typefaces, the choice for a logotype is important. The typography is often used to convey a mood or feeling about a brand, and therefore need to be exaggerated in order to do so. San serifs = modern. Serif = classic/old fashioned. Thick = masculine. Thin = feminine. Those are extremely broad examples but they usually hold true. But as designers that usually doesn’t cover our concept enough so we manipulate letters and symbols to convey the brand. Some end up being more successful than others. Fendi and Ralph Lauren’s identities both work well for the brand, but its the name itself in these cases that communicate the power of the brands, not so much the identity, or typeface chosen. My thoughts; pick a legible, respectable typeface that corresponds to the brand.

Finally the idea of a symbol is more or less thrown out the window. Nike’s symbol works, but that’s because its been burned into our minds. At matchstic we haven’t worked with clients as massive as Nike so I question why symbols are demonize. In the identities I’ve come in contact with, a symbol can communicate core ideas quickly and concisely. My thoughts; don’t rule out a symbol. Some are pretty nice sometimes.

_gern

post script. there’s a hidden if you search for them.