A Thread on Marketing: "How Brands Grow" by Prof. Byron Sharp - It seems like every book available on marketing today promises a bunch, vows to be different & useful, but then delivers little in the way of truly unique & applicable advice. (1/25)

Most marketing books are tactical in nature, focusing on segments, specific channels, drilling into smaller and smaller arenas of activity, until the expertise acquired from the book is only applicable under the tightest environmental conditions.... (2/25)
"I am now an expert in demand generation from specialized microsite SnapChat retargeting campaigns for 30-34 year old art school graduates concerned about credit liquidity, living in/around Baltimore with cat allergies."
Face with rolling eyes
(3/25)
While we are awash in advice on tactics, marketers are SUPER THIRSTY for strategic advice on how to properly employ such activities.

That's why Byron Sharp's "How Brands Grow" kicks every other marketing book in the shins. (4/25)
Let's jump right in with this graphic, I'll explain Byron's Old/New World vision as far as I can, but in the end, you have to read this book to feel it's healing waters quench your parched marketing soul. (5/25)
The book starts off like a goddamn birthday party for a creative like me - "Marketing is a creative profession and one of the main jobs is to get noticed!" -- That sounds like my entire schooling history and explains why I was in trouble a lot as a kid! (6/25)
Supported by mountains of evidence from the work of @EhrenbergBass and @The_IPA, Sharp details the benefits of marketing from a "new world" perspective, that is juxtaposed against an "old world," Kotlerian (Philip Kotler) view of the profession. (7/25)
The "old world" view of marketing, which many hold up as the current paragon of the profession, emphasizes segmentation, brand loyalty, and persuasion as the hallmarks of good marketing & advertising. No qualms there, right? (8/25)
Zero in on loyal brand audiences who are viewing your ads in a rational capacity, teach them the messages, convince them of the uniqueness, and show them you are different and create conversations and then they will crave your marketing!😋(.....wait for it.....) (9/25)
Adding tech to this only makes sense, RIGHT? Digital ads, surveilling opportunities, intention testing - find the exact people, location, and moment, serve them the quantum slice of advertising that fits their persona, funnel them, measure it...now we're marketing! RIGHT? (10/25)
Sharp sees things a little differently in the "new world".... (11/25)
You advertise in a crowded world and very few people pay attention to messaging, indeed, the large portion of a consumer's purchase decision is actively ignoring a vast majority of labels to find a small set of recognizable and salient brands to make a choice from. (12/25)
So the good news here - no one truly gives a sh*t about your UVP, USP, merits and benefits - not because these things aren't there or meaningful to you, but because consumers just don't even know your brand exists in the first place! (13/25)
The goal of advertising is to first get noticed and then build and refresh memory structures through relevant associations, not convince an emotional and distracted audience of the rational/unique merits of a product. (14/25)
Marketers build brands with advertising by getting noticed, and not just to brand loyalists, but to everyone in the category because, there is no such thing as 100% brand love. (15/25)
100% loyalty is a dumb thing to quest for in marketing because consumers are brand agnostic, and metrics-wise, focusing on a smaller slice of any market segment, no matter how loyal, caps your potential for actual growth. (This is so painfully eloquent it hurts) (16/25)
Huge successful brands like Coke & Dove - the majority of their buyers are not Brand Loyalists that hoard these precious brands in their underground bunkers. (17/25)
No, the goal in big brand ad campaigns is to rope in Ultra-Light buyers, because that is the overwhelming majority of the brand buyers. Meaning, 50% of *all* people who buy Coke, in one year, buy it once or twice. ONCE. A. YEAR. (18/25)
A whopping 87% of all Dove buyers bought the brand only a few times...in five years. Take a look from this chart from @wiemersnijders and his brilliant book, "Eat Your Greens" (19/25)
That 20+ bump on the far right are the "loyal purchasers," the Valhalla for most modern marketing strategies. And the huge bars to the left are brand buyers who bought Dove once, and the shaded bar is people who knew the brand, but did not buy it. (20/25)
Look at the potential for growth here.
Does brand growth mean getting more & more of that small bump on the right, or, does it happen by capturing a more category buyers with distinct, branded, salient and broad reaching marketing campaigns? (21/25)
This book is amazing for several reasons, but the most profound to me is this seemingly old school advertising advice somehow feels new. (22/25)
As marketing interfaces with digital culture, we've become so entranced by behaviors, segments, and finding ways to hack into psychological consumer models, that we've left the heavy, brand lifting activity behind us in favor of whisper-thin fixes that don't work. (23/25)
And so, the average lifespan for a CMO is dwindling down because from them upwards, no one has a firm grasp on what the marketing department ACTUALLY DOES IN THE FIRST PLACE! (24/25)

(Wrote a musical about this problem.🎶"ROI: The Musical") -> https://t.co/tJM83xA0Dy
So - pick up the book, there is a NEW version out, and a sequel, get with Ehernberg Bass, dig into marketing science and other like-minded entities like @The_IPA @EffWorks and keep pushing good marketing advice. ✊-> https://t.co/VODHyDkY7R

More from Culture

@bellingcat's attempt in their new book, published by
@BloomsburyBooks, to coverup the @OPCW #Douma controversy, promote US and UK gov. war narratives, and whitewash fraudulent conduct within the OPCW, is an exercise in deception through omission. @BloomsburyPub @Tim_Hayward_


1) 2000 words are devoted to the OPCW controversy regarding the alleged chemical weapon attack in #Douma, Syria in 2018 but critical material is omitted from the book. Reading it, one would never know the following:

2) That the controversy started when the original interim report, drafted and agreed by Douma inspection team members, was secretly modified by an unknown OPCW person who had manipulated the findings to suggest an attack had occurred. https://t.co/QtAAyH9WyX… @RobertF40396660


3) This act of attempted deception was only derailed because an inspector discovered the secret changes. The manipulations were reported by @ClarkeMicah
and can be readily observed in documents now available https://t.co/2BUNlD8ZUv….

4) @bellingcat's book also makes no mention of the @couragefoundation panel, attended by the @opcw's first Director General, Jose Bustani, at which an OPCW official detailed key procedural irregularities and scientific flaws with the Final Douma Report:
I woke up this morning to hundreds of notifications from this tweet, which is literally just a quote from a book I am giving away tonight.

The level of vitriol in the replies is a new experience for me on here. I love Twitter, but this is the dark side of it.

Thread...


First, this quote is from a book which examines castes and slavery throughout history. Obviously Wilkerson isn’t claiming slavery was invented by America.

She says, “Slavery IN THIS LAND...” wasn’t happenstance. American chattel slavery was purposefully crafted and carried out.

That’s not a “hot take” or a fringe opinion. It’s a fact with which any reputable historian or scholar agrees.

Second, this is a perfect example of how nefarious folks operate here on Twitter...

J*mes Linds*y, P*ter Bogh*ssian and others like them purposefully misrepresent something (or just outright ignore what it actually says as they do in this case) and then feed it to their large, angry following so they will attack.


The attacks are rarely about ideas or beliefs, because purposefully misrepresenting someone’s argument prevents that from happening. Instead, the attacks are directed at the person.

You May Also Like

THE MEANING, SIGNIFICANCE AND HISTORY OF SWASTIK

The Swastik is a geometrical figure and an ancient religious icon. Swastik has been Sanatan Dharma’s symbol of auspiciousness – mangalya since time immemorial.


The name swastika comes from Sanskrit (Devanagari: स्वस्तिक, pronounced: swastik) &denotes “conducive to wellbeing or auspicious”.
The word Swastik has a definite etymological origin in Sanskrit. It is derived from the roots su – meaning “well or auspicious” & as meaning “being”.


"सु अस्ति येन तत स्वस्तिकं"
Swastik is de symbol through which everything auspicios occurs

Scholars believe word’s origin in Vedas,known as Swasti mantra;

"🕉स्वस्ति ना इन्द्रो वृधश्रवाहा
स्वस्ति ना पूषा विश्ववेदाहा
स्वस्तिनास्तरक्ष्यो अरिश्तनेमिही
स्वस्तिनो बृहस्पतिर्दधातु"


It translates to," O famed Indra, redeem us. O Pusha, the beholder of all knowledge, redeem us. Redeem us O Garudji, of limitless speed and O Bruhaspati, redeem us".

SWASTIK’s COSMIC ORIGIN

The Swastika represents the living creation in the whole Cosmos.


Hindu astronomers divide the ecliptic circle of cosmos in 27 divisions called
https://t.co/sLeuV1R2eQ this manner a cross forms in 4 directions in the celestial sky. At centre of this cross is Dhruva(Polestar). In a line from Dhruva, the stars known as Saptarishi can be observed.