As I wrote in a recent blog, I only watch Network TV for the commercials. I laugh, I cry, and I write about the commercials which cause me to lose sleep. I haven’t slept since I saw this one.

I grabbed some images from their site, pounded on my keyboard and will send this to my New Media Protégé, Swat Khan for posting before bedtime tonight. Or I’ll have to find some Ambien.

2009 is the 150th birthday of Brinks, a deeply established brand.

2009 is when Brinks changed its name and abandoned their brand equity.

Hello? Is anyone home?

What’s with the background? Isn’t one of your brand attributes the protection of human lives?

Which name and logo conveys the feeling of safety and security for your family and your home? Will the two blue curved shapes above and below the word VIEW cause the bad guys to run from your home as they did when they saw the old name and logo.

Brinks = security, period.

Everyone knows that in their gut, except for the Brinks management team.

Let’s reminisce about the Brinks brand and their messaging. I remember a TV spot from years ago showing the vault door closing, causing a huge, strong, metal on metal locking sound. It was almost shocking, but it was true to their brand – security.

Let’s look at their key image and their new brand voice. Does it make you feel more secure?

When I saw this ad I thought of 411, not 911.

What happened to the tough looking uniformed security guard protecting my family? Is he no longer politically correct?

If Mr. Smiley represents the new Broadview brand image, along with their ten minute logo, I will rent the largest safe deposit box at my bank and keep my valuables there. The kids won’t be very comfortable, but it’s for their own good. It is also much cheaper than Mr. Smiley’s protection.

Does anyone have an explanation for this name and brand image wrong turn?

Dealing with today’s marketing budget cuts; research is often the first to go. This forces strategists like me, to extrapolate conclusions from scraps of data we find online.

Some companies are turning to Online Survey Firms who recruit participants to complete a given number of surveys by offering incentives. Crap in, crap out.

I am unable to find empirical data proving or disproving my position on online survey results. I am hoping that you will be able to enlighten me and cause me to change my thinking.

I believe that online surveys are the best invention to date for improving one’s self esteem.

Most if not all computer users have heard the rumors about Big Brother and the web.

They believe that Google knows the name of the owner of all computers and is collecting data by collecting their search queries.  It is happening now. A significant feature of Web 3.0 is the ability to collect and use of such data. “We want to be able to provide the most appropriate results based upon your search history.”

So when an online survey asks for your household’s income category, why click $25,000 to $30,000? Why not click $75,000 to $80,000? Don’t you feel better about yourself already?

Even if they are not that paranoid and signed up for an incentivized survey program, they have provided the survey firm with their name and contact information. They must wonder how their answers will be used and shared. Either consciously or subconsciously they believe that they have the ability to upgrade their demographic profile. It may even help them to land a better job.

So naturally they answer questions in a manner consistent with their fantasy self image. They will select the answers in a manner to best represent their new demographic profile or to achieve their individual (and unpredictable) agenda.

Your thoughts?

There was nothing interesting on cable last night so I watched brainless Network TV hoping to see some new commercials. I watched a high production value spot which appeared to be on strategy. Not knowing their strategy, I analyzed the creative and the product/benefits they chose to show and backed into a strategy, which seemed to make sense. Many agencies back into strategies as a matter of practice.

Near the end of the spot, the advertiser prominently displayed their URL and a voice-over pronounced it clearly.

What struck me as odd was that the URL had nothing at all to do with the product, its name, category, or even its benefits.

I had to write it down so I could visit the site. Sure enough; the site was for that product. I studied it at all angles, any connection to the product, name or benefits whatsoever – no, easy to remember – no, grabbing topspin from a well known URL – no.

What were they thinking?

Is it important for a B2C URL to have some type of nexus to the product or service?

For many years, I commuted 76-freeway miles every workday, which is not unusual in Southern California.

I have always wondered why drivers of vehicles displaying their company’s brand, are not trained to be considerate drivers. I suspect that the rationale for branding their vehicles is that it is free advertising. However, free sometimes has a significant cost.

I can’t tell you how many times I have been cutoff, or not given common courtesies by drivers of vehicles splattered with company or product logos. I often coach client’s employees about the reason for and the use of their new “brand-voice.” According to Michael Eisner, a brand is made up of thousands of little gestures.

I received one of those thousands of little gestures when a van next to me, with a large product logo on the side, veered into my lane and caused me to slam on the brakes. I honked my horn at the driver of the van and he rolled down his window and gave me a gesture. His gesture was to stick his hand out and raise one finger. I wonder how many people saw that gesture and the van’s logos. I have never bought that product again.

Is it a risky tactic to brand company vehicles, when you cannot ensure the courteous “brand-driving” and the behavior of your “ambassadors of good-will” at the wheel?