Tag Archives: sponsors

Online Video

WheezyWaiter on YouTube Work Ethic

6 Comments

It hasn’t been long since Craig Benzine was waiting tables in a Chicago restaurant. And as his YouTube handle implies (WheezyWaiter) the asthmatic didn’t let sickness stop him from filling a shift. Before he stopped waiting tables, he’d awaken at 6 to spend several hours (or more) to create a daily video before work. And he’d somehow sneak in an extra few hours to interact with fans (something he’s decreased to focus on making videos).

Now fetching an impressively consistent 150-200,000 views on each of his near-daily videos, the YouTube creator (and member of a rock band) takes his same work ethic to YouTube.

Benzine was one of dozens of YouTube partners who assembled in downtown Chicago’s Columbian College yesterday for an education session sponsored by Google.

YouTube has been quietly roaming the country — from NYC and California to the southeast and now Midwest– to help independent video creators, facilitate their interaction with other video makers, and provide them tips on growing and sustaining an audience.

I spoke, obviously, on “how to pimp your YouTube channel,” a mock title for what was really designed to:
1) Remind other YouTubers not to expect fame, subscribers or money to “fill the empty bowl they call life,”
2) Provide them with tips on how to make content advertisers seek
3) Give them practical advice on seeking sponsors directly or through intermediaries (and importantly what to avoid and say “no” to)
4) Keep them aware that the audience should always come first…

Even if you’ve got a pretty badass shoe sponsor like WheezyWaiter:
http://lalawag.com/2011/06/30/how-social-are-your-shoes-tweak-footwear-makes-sneakers-go-viral/

And those shoes are special. Benzine explained, when I interviewed him briefly for the attendees, his well-worn pair are the only shores he owns.

Is that a brilliant marketing move, or simply the signs of a humble guy who doesn’t need an Imelda-Marcos-shoe collection to keep his feet on the ground?

advertising, book

Tiger Wood’s Sponsors Scramble to Reposition Campaigns

6 Comments

Most Americans watch with intrigue about Tiger Woods and his sexual scandals (see this guy’s video claiming Tiger took him to Medieval Times, played with his golf balls and used his wood on him, or join the ratings of his women at Bleacher Reports). But me marketers are more interested in how Tiger Woods sponsors will handle their public affiliations with the philandering golfer.

Tiger is now, of course, the poster child for professional success at all costs. That fits quite well into business-consultant leader Accenture’s core positioning. But how will other brands adapt campaigns?

tiger woods women

Gatorade’s axed the Tiger “Focus” drink “before” the scandal (opting instead for a Lindsay Lohan “Purge” product line), other sponsors have pulled Tiger ads and remained silent about future plans.

Fortunately, thanks to WillVideoforFood, some of the planet’s most well-known and trusted brands need not suffer the humiliation of dropping Tiger when he’s down, or face the shame of affiliating with him during his, um, “discretions.”

For no cost, I’ve provided prominent Tiger Woods sponsors with some campaign slogans and adaptions that leverage this media sensation… turning lemons into lemon-ball vodka shots.

Tiger Woods hole

  • AT&T: “Better US Coverage Than Verizon or Tiger Woods’ Penis.”
  • Nike: “Just Do Her. And Her.”
  • Accenture: “We Know What it Takes to Pork a Tiger” (see existing ad, soon to replaced with footage of Tiger stumbling out of hotel rooms wearing only socks).
  • American Express: “Do you know me in the Biblical sense? Don’t tell my wife.” Also consider “Don’t Leave Home Without It, dark glasses, and a prepaid mobile phone.” Tiger may simply point to his crotch to punch the word “it.”
  • Gillete: “The Best a Man Can Get” campaign can pretty much stick with its campaign, and Tiger’s “the only thing that matters is today” line. He’ll be saying that a lot to his wife and family in coming months.

There are certainly well-meaning public relations and advertising professionals convening at this moment to determine how they’ll avoid getting mauled by Tiger’s scandal. And they’re reading consumer-generated media to get sentiment ratings and determine how this disaster is already effecting them.

Give those folks a break and toss them some ideas, huh?

book, Online Video

Brands Looking for Good Video Content Are Smoking Acid

10 Comments

It’s very obvious to advertisers to buy media that interupts popular television shows. Supply/demand creates expensive spots for the Superbowl, and bargain prices for reruns of Full House.

But when branded entertainment became vogue, someone smoked bad acid and promoted a ridiculous concept. Get the sponsor before launching a show, and sell ’em based on the quality of the content. This assumes that agencies and video producers know what content will become popular and influential, (and worse yet that advertisering sponsors can). Wrong. Wrong. Who could have predicted ANYONE in the top 10 most-subscribed YouTube list? Who could have predicted that I’d be a most-viewed YouTube comedian, for crying out loud? And yes I know people don’t smoke acid, jerk.

GoDaddy took a sole sponsorship on “Internet Superstar” (a very clever show that’s now RIP). I loved the show, but I also recognize that — for reasons that elude me — audiences don’t flock to a well-produced show about the other video stars and shows. It similarly perplexes me that Pepsi-backed PopTub hasn’t yet developed a larger audience, but perhaps the “Entertainment Tonight of online video” defies the niche nature of online video (then again, I laughed when I saw magazines about the Internet, and some have survived).

Don’t get me wrong. I believe GoDaddy picked well with Internet Superstar, and that Pepsi found a good show on PopTub. But it’s easy and unwise to pitch an idea, get backing, and then search for an audience with the sponsor’s money.

I’d take a more pragmatic approach as an advertiser. I would promote via what people watch and not what “the suits” and focus groups predict will be hot. That means I’d partner with something as inane as Fred (assuming I felt confident that his bit had staying power). And if I found a brilliant concept (iChannel) that hadn’t garnered an audience, I’d let someone else fund their launch. As I said, online-video popularity is not about talent alone.

An exception, of course, would be Burger King sponsoring content by a known animator (Seth Mac Farlane) that is getting traction because audiences like Seth’s style, and BK is pumping it with ad dollars. And who wouldn’t rather watch “Seth sellout” rather than Burger King commercials on a Burger King YouTube channel?

But when a popular YouTuber spawns a spinoff channel, it often develops a quick following without ad dollars to pimp it or a well-known offline personality.

  • MrSafety‘s relatively new “Mean Kitty” channel is about to surpass me in subscribers.
  • What The Buck Show host, Michael Buckley, has an extremely popular channel where all he does is vlog.
  • Another spinoff (BamBamKaBoosh) amassed 50,000 subscribers in days without any videos — just because popular creators promoted it.
  • Show me an agency that has developed video content and garnered such a fast and loyal audience without promoting it (with ads that might be better served to sell their product not a lame show).

Now the power of being a sole sponsor is far greater than an interruption ad, and these programs shouldn’t be evaluated on a basis of total views but on the impact of the views (not CPM, folks, but Dynamic Logic pre/post awareness and attitude trackers).

I’d rather have a small product placement on the most popular YouTube channel than be the sole backer of an amazing show that’s in search for an audience. Even in branded entertainment, follow the crowds unless you’re extremely confident you can create your own.