Richard, you've heard of these things called price comparison sites, right?

"Virgin (which I opted for) has the stench of your un-cool uncle that is trying to get with the kids"

I'm confused - are you saying that brands reflect their users or not?

Had the same experience about 3 months ago. And like you opted for Vigin (hey, Bransons a wanker, but I respect him).
Problem is with these brands, apart from when you purchase a contract, the only interaction you really have with the brand is when something goes wrong (and paying your bill). Brands need to find positive ways to engage with customers beyond painting F1 cars.
Cheers Richard!

Since you are there take a look at their CRM programme. If you haven't got your welcome package yet, take a closer look because it is custom fit to your phone, provider and plan.

I had been thinking about this one while reading your CRM posts.It is not the b2c-chat CRM has promised, but one of the few examples of meaningful personal(ized) communication. They found a positive way to engage with customers (picking up Nat's line here).

"I find the ads for Orange in UK cinemas really very funny"

---

Certainly the only ads that actually do something for orange. The rest of the campaign is just 'pretty' noise.

First a hands up that I work for VCCP for do the O2 advertising but there is some cool stuff that they do for o2 customers - like priority ticketing for all concerts and events at the dome (now the o2), VIP fast track queues at the O2 and special O2 subscriber + mates bar, free booze and pies at football and rugby, backstage access at the O2 wireless festival etc. They are working hard to build those Am-Ex-esque "Benefits of Membership" which is I think exactly the right thing to be doing.

These brands are merely facilitators that enable us to engage with our buddies. Unfortunately, they have lost track with how we engage, so they don't really understand where they fit and how they can help us. And when you have no insight, what's the best insight you can fall back on ....everyone loves a deal!

They are alot like motorways; can't be avoided - never a pleasant experience, difficult to update, disrupt everyone's lives; exist in some parallel universe that doesn't quite make sense/logic.

You talk about Carphone Warehouse..Phones 4 U is a step above it. Their stores are even designed to look like a call centre - does anyone know why?

Amelia - but what is the point of O2? Does anyone there know? If so it would be nice if they told us. O2 is a business idea but there is no idea behind the business.

I think in the case of mobile/cell phones we can't ignore that the actual product is anything but consumer centred. From the begining the service has been complicated and designed to squeeze out every ounce of profit -from 1 minute billing to complicated "surprise" roaming rates. I know this has changed over the years but it feels as if each advance has been reluctant and delayed as long as possible. So it's hard to feel an emotional connection to a positioning when it's painted like a pretty picture over something that lacks substance. I have a good feeling about my actual phone but share your indifference for the service. So in this case, it feels like the phone is the car brand (the VW, the BMW) while the service is the car dealership. How many people have a warm and fuzzy relationship with their car dealer? Maybe Carphone Warehouse isn't such a bad name after all.

Richard - help me understand what you mean by "what's the point of O2" - do you mean O2 the brand or O2 the business?

"They are alot like motorways; can't be avoided - never a pleasant experience, difficult to update, disrupt everyone's lives; exist in some parallel universe that doesn't quite make sense/logic."

Um... motorways can't be avoided and disrupt everyone's lives..."?

There's only one things about that post that exists in some parallel universe that doesn't quite make sense/logic...

Amelia,

Clearly the point of the O2 business is to make a profit it can return to whoever owns it. But my question is what role does the brand seek to play in my life because I'm confused and the net result is they didn't get my business - they seem to have nothing to say to me.

BTW O2 twelve month rolling churn stood at 27% at the beginning of last year - latest figures I can find. No better than Vodafone. Maybe you have more up to date figures suggesting that this has been significantly reduced.

I’ve often ranted about this in the past. I think the problem is a lack of real competition, due to the high cost of entry. The mobile network business is a government-granted quadopoly (or is it a quintopoly now? I can’t remember), which seems to make them lazy. “So what if 30% of our customers leave? We’ll pick up another 30% who’ve left somewhere else.” As yet, people aren’t giving up their mobiles, so disgusted are they with the rubbish service. Instead they just ignore it, and look for the best deal for the next 12 months.

Companies wishing to get into the market to try and offer something better, have just two options: to build their own physical network infrastructure (very expensive, and only an option if there is a licence available and they can afford the exorbitant cost of buying it), or to do a deal with an existing licence holder. But these MVNO’s seem pretty limited in the innovation they can offer, as they can’t reconfigure their host network’s protocols to, say, charge in a fundamentally different way.

How different it might have been if there was just one mobile network infrastructure, with much more open access for competition? Better for our environment, and possibly our health. And we might see some real innovation from small, young, modern entrepreneurial companies who do ‘have a point’, and are hungry to prove it. Ho hum.

(Mind you, this might all be toss. I’m not exactly bowled over by the innovation in the broadband sector, even though post-local loop unbundling that market looks a little like I’m describing.)

Absobloodylutely.

"Oh yes and there is 3, wayward 3, I think I'd be more likely to entrust my children to the local parish priest for the weekend than give them any money."

ROFLMAO.

God. What a wonderful way you have of making your points!!! Love it! And glad I'm not on the receiving end of your dissatisfaction. ;)

Yes, yes and thrice yes.

A while ago I challenged Orange's beautiful "the longer you stay together the better things get" dancers ad at the Orange shop in Paddington, and was surprised to receive an immediate upgrade to a new phone, keeping my old number and not having to sign up to a new expensive tariff.

A while later I tried to get the Orange Broadband deal... OMG what a disaster. A friend of mine works for Orange and I challenged him on this service, plus all the unrequested text messages I get offering me further upgrades and services I don't want.

He shrugged his shoulders, looked at his shoes and mumbled an apology. The beautiful brand ads are truly pretty noise - the swan gliding across the lake while underneath the grubby business of milking customers and outsourcing activities to agents who do not care about the brand or its relationship with customers goes on.

I read some research recently (i think from phones4u) that said that the yoot didn't care about operators brands, they only cared about handsets. for them, that was where the 'value' was.

seemed to explain why o2 still lead the market despite (or because of) the DM style advertising. they are acting like a commodity in a commodity market.

unless there's some real innovation in the category, whether product or service, that's actually relevant and/or useful to the consumer, i don't think any amount of pretty advertising will change the the fact that mobile phone operators have become commodities.

it also doesn't help that all mobile telcos use the same format for their TV ads (cue the nu-folk soundtrack).

I totally agree.

When I went looking for a phone and network all I cared about was having a Nokia. Not because they look good or are cool but I get the interface and I am familiar with them.

And yes the networks have become commodities.

But that is an excuse for lazy marketing.

Marketing has a job to de-commodifiy brands and categories - if it is not doing this what is it doing?

I think it's difficult to call o2's marketing lazy - it's actually worked very hard for them. They are number 1 in a very competitive market by a decent margin. In fact, in answer to your question, I'd say achieving that was the job of marketing.

I do agree that decommodifying a low involvement product can have clear benefits - specifically the ability to command a higher margin. However, I'm pretty sure you'd also agree that making a 'beautiful film' about some random emotional belief (with a product tacked on the end) isn't enough to do that anymore, not least because that's what every other fucker is doing too.

I think this is because without real innovation in products or services the advertising just seems very hollow. I might be convinced enough by a big emotional ad telling me that Orange thinks people are good together etc etc to get a contract - but that feeling won't last more than 40 minutes on hold to a CSR that doesnt speak English and doesn't know what product i'm calling about. In fact, I'm more and more convinced that the brand manager in a company isn't the marketing director but the COO.