Hi Terrance!

> Whats up Mike.

Nothing much with me. How's the wrapping biz? I find the concept facinating.

Anyway...

> How can you say that image ads dont work?

By movng my lips and tongue while forcing air over my vocal cords. The sound made sounds like "Image ads don't work". :o)

I should really clarify...

I call image ads... insitutional ads... and they are ads that offer no benefit to the viewer of the ad. They are the chest thumping ads. And often, you scratch your head wondering what is actually being advertised.

> I firmly believe it depends on your
> *product*
> or *service* to determine if direct
> marketing or imaging should be the best way

I'd say it more depends on WHAT you want the ad to achieve... as it's been proven time after time that

The More You Tell, The More You Sell

Reason Why.

> For example lets take company like *Nike*.

Okay...

> Im using this company because there is
> nothing addictive about them like cigarettes
> or soda so you cant say there is an
> addictive ingrediant(sp) involved.

(They could have a chemical which leeches into your feet over time. ;o))

> You might think that Nike makes its money
> off it well designed clothes, shoes and
> accessories. Not really. I mean they are
> really no better than any other type of
> athletic apparel.

I agree. In fact, give me a pair of Dunlop Volleys over any other sport shoe any day. They last longer and go with whatever you choose to wear.

> The reason Nike is #1 is because of its
> image. I dont care how much direct marketing
> you place with a rival company ...Nike's
> Image is more known and more profitable.

Currently this is the case. But it wasn't always the case. And it may not always be the case.

> They didnt use direct marketing by stating
> that you will run faster with buying their
> products. They didnt say that you will look
> better with its product.

Can't comment on how they rose to be number one. But there's a pretty good bet that besides what you mention below, Rebok dropped the batton somewhere along the line...

> What did they do? They used athletes such as
> Michael Jordan as celebrity endorsers.

ENDORSEMENTS!

A standard and PROVEN method for increasing sales.

FUBU clothing got their start because Hollifield wore one of their shirts.

> Michael Jordon took a shoe that should cost
> no more than 20 bucks to buy at your local
> footlocker and turned it into a $200.00 shoe
> that cant stay in stores. Why? The image of
> the
> that Nike built around Michael Jordan gave
> the shoe a higher standard then other shoes.

There is something else to be considered...

Cool.

That ellusive search for cool. What makes one thing cool and take off - soon to become the product of choice for the mass market - and another product wallow in obscurity forever?

> Thats what I call building an image.

It's obvious there is some confusion in this thread revolving around what is meant by "Image Building."

> In fact I believe that most business that
> deal with clothing would be better at
> dealing with Image than direct marketing
> because the products
> are "image products"

See comments above. (Peterman catalog?)

> George Foreman Lean Mean Grilling Machine
> is another example. If you go to Wal Mart
> and looked for home grills you would see 10
> different brands on the shelf. They all do
> the exact same things. The George Foreman
> grill is the most expensive one of the
> bunch.

> Guess which one will people buy?

> They will buy the George Foreman grill
> because of the image that is associated with
> a celebrity. Its
> not because its the best grill or that it
> will make you leaner( George Foreman is
> still superheavy)...its all because that
> image he created around the grill.

It's because his names lends credibility to the product.

Again, a standard proven marketing ploy.

> So I see no reason not to mix image and
> direct marketing and then determine the best
> results based upon the product you are
> trying to sell

Yes. In direct marketing it's an endorsement, or otherwise known as a Testimonial. And the more the potential buyer knows the endorser, the more they believe in the product, and the greater the chance of them buying.

See, Terrance, direct sales techniques - salesmanship in print, video, audio, film, or whatever medium you choose - is proven to work.

An ad that has salesmanship is not an institutional ad.

Ads without salesmanship do not sell. There are thousands of companies littering the business highway to testify to the fact. (Just as there are many companies cruising along the business highway thanking the salesmanship in their ads.)

As I said to Dien... he was calling everything that could be considered to be standard sales-generating marketing (salesmanship), image building.

And you have taken another of those elements... the good old testimonial/endoresment and given it Image Building status too.

"Adjudicator!!! Please give us some direction by clarifying the term "Image Building" so we can discuss the subject from the same point of reference."

Michael Ross