I read in Ad Age recently that AT&T, the nation's second-largest advertiser, has shifted lead agency responsibilities for its estimated $3.345 billion account to Omnicom Group's BBDO, New York, the agency for what was Cingular Wireless, now AT&T's mobility unit.
Is anyone else besides me annoyed that AT&T has dumped the Cingular name? I liked that little orange jumping jack. I thought it had great brand value, was interesting and fun, and although the orange presented process color printing problems, it had other valuable attributes. Doris Brown, VP of Marketing at Pantone, talks about the emotional attributes of different colors. Here is what she had to say about orange: "Orange is a warmer, more vibrant combination of red and yellow that shares a lot of attributes of those colors. It conjures up energy, warmth and the sun. It is not as intense or aggressive as red might be but carries a lot of the cheerfulness of yellow." She indicates that even though orange is out of the traditional color gamut space of four color process (though within the hexachrome gamut), there is a big pickup in the use of orange, especially for packaging.
And what did she say about blue, AT&T's corporate color? "Blue is America’s favorite color, but blue has also been the color for big companies to run with, like IBM and AT&T. Even Xerox used to be blue. If you were dealing with anything with dollars and numbers, as a business color you would go to blue. It spoke of your technical capabilities and your ability to deal with numbers and figures." Exciting, huh?
When Cingular was still Cingular, three of my four telephone companies used orange in their logo--Cingular, Vonage, and my cell phone company in the Dominican Republic, France-based Orange Telecommunications. I have heard it reported that Cingular invested some $4 billion dollars in building the brand. What is AT&T thinking??? Does anyone else besides me see AT&T as an old, boring company? If you read Carly Fiorina's book, Tough Choices, where she talks about her AT&T, Lucent and HP experiences--a terrific book, by the way--you get a insider's view of how internally focused the company was--and is. I, for one, would be more likely to migrate to a fun, innovative brand like Cingular if I were looking for a new phone company, than stodgy old AT&T, even if they do have the iPhone. And I am old... how do you think the younger folks feel? Did AT&T do ANY market research before they made that decision? Or was it all based on corporate ego?
Maybe BBDO can talk some sense into them. What do you think?
Update 7/12
I inquired about interviewing someone at AT&T and got the following email response, which is probably pretty much the same information I would have gotten had I spoken with someone live. It was interesting to me to see how much discussion this topic generated. I wonder if the majority of consumers really do think about doing business with the company with the most complete portfolio ... I would think that is more of a B2B thing. Well, for those of you who have been unhappy with Cingular customer service, I would be interested to hear if it has improved or improves over time with AT&T. Of course, we could all go to Sprint, and if they don't meet our requirements, we can just deluge the call center and get fired. Interesting times.
AT&T Response:
Around the world, the AT&T brand is recognized for meaningful innovation, a commitment to customer service, high quality, and exceptional reliability. One brand is less confusing and better communicates AT&T’s benefits as the most complete provider. One brand also conveys to customers the most important aspects of the AT&T-BellSouth merger – convenience, convergence, and integration. As all operations are moved under a single brand, AT&T expects to realize related synergies with an estimated net present value of approximately $2.8 billion. To continue investing in three separate brands is inefficient.
Our branding decisions and executions are rooted in customer research. Through customer discussions, we concluded the AT&T brand best represents the traits that customers told us were important to them in a communications company. Our research shows that the most complete provider will win in the marketplace. Re-branding wireless more clearly communicates AT&T’s complete portfolio.
Our wireless and wireline agencies are collaborating, balancing creative and media to generate the best mix for the new company. These agencies worked closely together to develop the branding campaign.
Discussion
By Adam Dewitz on Jul 10, 2007
Not only is AT&T an old boring company, for many they are company that helped the http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/" rel="nofollow">US government illegally wiretap its citizens and is now http://www.savetheinternet.com/=faq#who" rel="nofollow">trying to break the Internet.
By Dave Mainwaring on Jul 10, 2007
AT&T may be old and boring, however, it has/had the image of reliability and being solid. There was a time when having AT&T stock was the best investment one could hold. I guess it can be a matter of age. I can recognize the AT&T brand however Cingular, Verizon and all the new kids just blend together as being commodities of equal value. AT&T on the other hand must be top shelf:) You might be safe in assuming AT&T did some heavy duty research before making the decision. Who was it that wrote recently about "What's in a Name?"
By Thomas D. Greer on Jul 10, 2007
I agree that it's a mistake to throw away all of the brand awareness built up for the Cingular brand. Anything swallowed by AT&T simply becomes AT&T. In terms of marketing and consumer perception, that means you've thrown any "good" that accrued to Cingular, and all you have left is the "bad" inevitably associated with such a large company as AT&T. The images that come to mind with AT&T: monopoly, old-fashioned technology, poor customer service.
By Jeremy on Jul 11, 2007
A few things to think about. When rebranding, did it make sense to rename the landline and dsl from AT&T/BellSouth to Cingular?
What about the rest of the world that knows the AT&T name but not Cingular?
-And AT&T was a regulated monopoly, like electric companies are now.
They are still as innovative as ever. They are about to release video calling from mobile phones, the first in the U.S... the whole company is shifting to IMS technologies.
By Gail Nickel-Kailing on Jul 11, 2007
One must consider the Cingular "tag line" though - "Fewest dropped calls" - now whose idea was that? Seems like you want to accentuate the positive, as an old song went, not the negative. I don't want fewest dropped calls - I want good service at a good price. Unfortunately I don't get that from Cingular.
All I can say is that every time I call customer support they tell me that whatever plan I'm on now is no longer available and they will update me to the new one - always for $20 a month more. It's gotten darn pricey to do business with them!
By Randy Davidson on Jul 11, 2007
The Cingular brand was very effective for younger people as something new, sorta "hip". I guess AT&T hooking up with the iPhone while at the same time trying to kill the hipper Cingular brand is about as good of timing as you can have to try and keep relevant with the younger consumers.
By Cary Sherburne on Jul 11, 2007
Although Cingular has been using "fewest dropped calls" as a tagline--and I agree with Gail that that is a bit of negative positioning!--my favorite was "raising the bar." That was brilliant and a positive approach. Did the "fewest dropped calls" line come in with AT&T? Not sure. But I am sure the pricing strategies Gail refers to are exacerbated now that they are part of AT&T.
I am going to try to contact someone there to find out what kind of focus groups they did to come to the decision about dropping the Cingular name ... wish me luck!
By Bryan Yeager on Jul 11, 2007
Here's my point of view (supposedly the younger, hip, tech-savvy crowd): I don't care about branding in terms of cell phones, and in terms of a number of other things. Cingular/AT&T has some really great commercials (the ones where the calls are dropped at inopportune times), Verizon's "Can you hear me now" commercials caught everyone's attention, and Sprint's recent commercials with Ron Livingston (Office Space) are pretty funny as well. None of them convince me one way or another what service to go to. In fact, I wish I didn't have to choose any of them. They all have horrible customer service with many horror stories outlined at Consumerist.com. I have to be tied into a 2-year contract to have any sort of decent service or phone, which I have to pay an exorbitant amount of money to get out of. I used to have Cingular; I now have Verizon. It's a hard choice to make. I wanted a Smartphone with broadband internet support. Do I choose Cingular, which has great phones but lackluster broadband support? Do I choose Verizon, which has some OK phones but great broadband coverage? In the end, it's like how I voted for the President in '04: It's the lesser of two evils. I chose based on service, even if it may cost a little more. I knew I could get service where I worked (something I couldn't get with Cingular) and way better broadband coverage. I mean, if I'm going to be stuck with it for two years, it better work for me. Basically, I want what's stable and what works. That's why I have an Apple computer, but won't buy an iPhone for a long while. If companies want people to remain loyal to their brand, they better follow produce an outstanding, stable, unique product with great customer service. AT&T's horrible customer service will be death of the iPhone so long as Apple lets them. Brand loyalty isn't what it used to be, and fruition of Web 2.0 and the growing tech-consciousness of people will continue the downward trend of brand loyalty unless companies intervene.
By Gretchen Peck on Jul 12, 2007
For a brief period of time, I actually worked for a small, boutique ad agency that did a lot of Cingular direct-mail campaigns. Funny, I'm not sorry to see the name/brand go. Why?
I used to have Cingular myself and found it to be a horribly unreliably service--incessantly dropped calls, poor customer service, plans that no one with an IQ of less than 175 could figure out.
Now I'm with Verizon, and haven't had a "Cingle" dropped call since. I imagine doing away with the brand was an easy call for AT&T, because so many customers were disappointed. I agree with Dave, it's about the perception of "tried and true (blue)." Even my husband has said, "Well, it's AT&T now, maybe we should go back!"
And I remind him, "Yeah, but it's STILL Cingular, just with new marketing."
And he whines (just kidding honey), "But I want an iPhone..."
Cheers!--Gretchen
By Jeremy Smith on Jul 12, 2007
We have entered a new area in the life of brands. In the past consumers were loyal to brands. Today’s consumers ages 15 to 26 are not married to brands in the way most of us have been. And even us more traditional consumers aren't quite as loyal as we used to be. We clearly have traded in Kodak as a major consumer photo brand! Last Christmas the hot electronics item was supposed to be the Xbox and Sony’s Playstation 3. While Microsoft and Sony did well the real winner was Nintendo which stole Christmas with their Wii gaming system. Today’s younger affluent consumers, who are the long term target of companies as they mature, are not married to their wireless companies but instead to the latest cell phone and technologies. Today a brand like Apple and their iPhone can come out of nowhere and turn the market upside down. While some of you think dropping the Cingular name is crazy I don’t think SBC had a choice. First of all SBC faced a difficult challenge, they owned the Cingular, AT&T as well as SBC Brands. Now that’s confusing. Many of these brands were wrapped up not just in the cellular business but traditional phone services, satellite television and data technologies. The company really needed to focus all their efforts under one brand. In the San Francisco Bay Area over the last ten years or so we’ve gone from Cellular One and Pacific Bell to SBC and AT&T to Cingular and now back to AT&T. All this transition has happened quite easily. Cellular phone manufacturers are also an important key to the success of any wireless company. If a wireless company does not have the latest hip phones today's youth will not stay with the brand. Most of the data I’ve read drives this point home. And according to one study 40% of the One Million plus consumer inquires to AT&T regarding the iPhone represented customers of Verizon, Sprint/Nextel and T-Mobile. In the iPhone we now have the potential for a massive switch by consumers between wireless carriers all eager to trade brand loyalty for the coolest cell phone ever introduced. Brand loyalty all thrown out the door. Apple’s iPhone clearly represents a shift in the wireless industry and AT&T’s competitors are worried. Why else would Verizon push congress to look in to the coveted AT&T iPhone deal? They are deeply concerned that Apple’s relationship may impact Verizon’s bottom line. Sprint/Nextel issued warnings to their managers in advance of the iPhone going on sale to expect a decline in business of as much as 6% due to the introduction of the iPhone As far as the AT&T not being the hippest brand in the world that’s only because most of us older folks remember the older AT&T. Today’s youth wouldn’t know and couldn’t care.
By Jeremy Smith on Jul 13, 2007
Following up on the comments I made yesterday a market analyst announced today that early sales numbers indicate that of the more than 700,000 iPhone's sold in the first weekend of the iPhone’s introduction 25% of the new iPhone customers were “Switchers.” Meaning AT&T took at least 175,000 customers away from their competitors in just three days. That is a tremendous change in and demonstrates that consumers care more about the product, the iPhone, than the wireless carrier. These numbers are now sending shockwaves through Europe as several wireless carriers are now fighting to get the rights to be the exclusive wireless carrier of the iPhone in Europe. I would love to be a fly on the wall in the Executive Board Room at Verizon. Having been the first US wireless company offered exclusivity on the iPhone Not only did Verizon pass on the phone they openly gloated that the phone would not be a success.
By Jeremy Smith on Jul 15, 2007
Here is some new data on the iPhone and AT&T which should get both Apple and AT&T pretty excited. Espeically when you consider that it is more expensive in general for a company to attract new clients than keep their exiting customers. And yes its early but it does show that the high price of the phone and costs for switching does not seem to be the barrier the naysers who predicted failure for Apple & AT&T predicted. This also points to the fact that the economy is still strong. And with Apple selling 750K plus phone at $499 to $599 with a 45% to 60% profit per phone is proving coolness and great design usually win out in our economy. USA Today reports that early iPhone adopters are overwhelmingly happy with their iPhones. 90% of the 200 owners said they were "extremely" or "very" satisfied with their phone. And 85% said they are "extremely" or "very" likely to recommend the device to others, says the online survey conducted and paid for by market researcher Interpret of Santa Monica, Calif. The firm surveyed 1,000 cellphone users July 6-10. Other statistics that came from the studies are included: • 51% of buyers were switching to AT&T from another carrier • 35% of carrier switchers paid an early termination fee (avg $167) to switch • 3 of 10 were first-time Apple customers. • for 4 of 10, the iPhone was their first iPod • New iPhone owners expected to pay about $35 more a month than their previous cellphone.
Discussion
Only verified members can comment.