In my last post I mentioned the nostalgia for children’s toys as seen in the Santander’s commercials. How delighted I was therefore, to see that Lego have pulled from their illustrious archives their award winning stop-frame animation ad ‘Kipper’ by TBWA. It’s a surreal look at the things kids can make out of a Lego with a brilliant voice-over by the late and great British comedian Tommy Cooper. ‘I said a kipper not a slipper. Ha hah ha.”

This master-class of creativity, simplicity and charm has more than stood the test of time – it’s appearing on TV and at cinemas now. Well done to Lego and their agency for having the courage to air it again. Have a look for yourself on YouTube. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY9lctGCZZE

With Spanish financial giant Santander’s rescue of the beleaguered, bankrupt British banks, I’ve watched with interest to see how they manage the change process as familiar high street brands like Abbey disappear forever.

One thing struck me on watching the Santander commercials, and I hope it’s unintended, is the pattern forming of children’s toys from my past. Lewis Hamilton, 2008 F1 world champion spearheads the brand. He’s been depicted as a plastic construction model (Airfix), racing his model car (Scalextric) in front of a plastic crowd, Airfix again. And in the latest unintelligible commercial, we see the construction of a bridge from red toy bricks (Lego – Danish for ‘let’s play’). So here’s my confident prediction for the future – Meccano, the model construction system set up by one Frank Hornby in 1908, will make an appearance very soon.

Are we seeing an unintended ‘mash-up’ between James May on the BBC and Santander’s advertising campaign? Probably not – it’s just that good old nostalgia is back in fashion.

Much was written on the aesthetics of Wolff Olins’ creation of the London Olympics 2012 brand when it was launched in 2007. The controversy no longer rages but having given it over two years worth of the ‘over night’ test, I’m still not a convert.

There’s probably little that I can contribute to the debate other than the fact that Wolff Olins have used a similar aperture technique of placing different images and colours behind the logo for other clients including NYC and Visit London. Old ideas for a new audience, that’s acceptable of course.

www.everyjoe.com/articles/2012-london-olympics-logo-controversy-the-2007-branding-year-in-review/

But, and it’s a big but, is there even a need for an Olympics ‘sub-brand’ for each host country? The Olympic movement has one of the strongest, globally identified brands there is. And it’s reinforced every two years to hundreds of millions of people across the world. Ask yourself these questions. Do you recall the logo for the Moscow, LA or even Rome games? Or the Winter Olympics 2006 in Torino? The answer is probably no.

But you could draw the Olympic symbol from memory couldn’t you? And you probably know that the interlocking circles represent the five continents. The personality of the games, but not the brand, comes through the history, culture and individuality of the host city, enhanced by the sporting heroes of the day – Bolt, Redgrave-Pinsent, Spitz and Owens spring to mind. And that’s an important distinction; the Olympic brand is independent of location. By creating a sub-brand - the offspring challenges the parent and weakens it.

Perhaps a more courageous Wolff Olins might have recommended as the logo for the Olympics 2012 something like this. The Olympic symbol with London 2012 in Helvetica placed underneath. If that was the case we’d probably now be debating whether London 2012 should be in black, blue, green, yellow or red?

I was lucky enough to be invited to attend the first major conference dedicated to how the Aerospace and Defence industry can help combat climate change. The Energy and Environmental Defence and Security Conference (E2DS’09) held at the RSA, London on November 5th to 6th gave a fascinating insight. Sponsors included Rolls Royce, EADS, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Saab, Northrop Grumman, ITT, Finmeccanica, ADS, ASD and others.

The extent of the very real climate change threat that we face was hammered home by keynote speaker Dr Berrien Moore, co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

This illuminating and thought provoking conference was a result of the vision of Nick Cook, journalist and MD of Dynamixx, the organisers of the event. As Nick said, “Our mission is to create a dynamic forum for the Aerospace and Defence community and so foster dialogue, debate and analysis of the many opportunities that await it in the energy and environmental arenas.”

Here at Beechwood, we’ve developed creative marcoms campaigns for our technology clients on The Greening of the Data Centre, Energy Efficiency, IT for the Environment and more. So it’s reassuring to think that, maybe one day, the Aerospace, Defence, IT and Technology sectors will all combine together to take up the challenge of climate change through collaboration and innovation.

http://dynamixx-e2d.com

With congratulations to Roz Littlewood and Graham Hart for managing such a successful event.

The recently announced, UK’s 12th annual Superbrands analysis saw Microsoft regain the number one position and Apple join the top 10 for the first time.

This yearly analysis of the top 500 brands is carried out by The Centre for Brand Analysis and measures brands not by value but by how much they are trusted by the British public. The brands are judged against three factors, quality, reliability and distinction.

It’s interesting to compare the results of this survey with the top twenty most valuable brands as detailed in a previous blog. There are some similarities, some differences and, of course, in the UK list of Superbrands, positions that may be a surprise to some of our clients in the US and EMEA

This survey defines a Superbrand as having established “the finest reputation in its field,” offering “significant emotional and/or tangible advantages over other brands, which customers want and recognise.”

Around 1,400 brands are considered by a panel of experts and more than 2,000 UK consumers take part in the voting.

The Top Twenty Five:

1 Microsoft
, 2 Rolex, 3 Google
, 4 British Airways, 5 
BBC
, 6 Mercedes-Benz
, 7 Coca-Cola, 8 
Lego
, 9 Apple, 10 Encyclopedia Britannica, 11 Virgin Atlantic, 12 Duracell, 13 Marks and Spencer, 14 Philadelphia, 15 Dulux, 16 BMW, 17 Colmans, 18 Dyson, 19 Ordnance Survey, 20 Nintendo, 21 Jaguar, 22 Sony, 23 BP, 24 Fisher-Price and 25 Andrex.

He’s a modern day William Hogarth and our streets (and museums) are a better place because of Banksy.

I was recently sent a document detailing all the international web domains by country. (Don’t ask why) So I am now the proud owner of a list that goes all the way from the Ascension Islands (.ac) to Zimbabwe (.zw). Reading through it gave me plenty of food for thought.

For instance, did you know that that Jersey (.je), Guernsey (.gg) and the Isle of Man (.im) have their own suffixes although they are part of the United Kingdom (.uk)? I certainly didn’t.

And did you know that .um was the domain suffix for United States Minor Outlying Islands? No? I’ve never heard of them either. The United States Minor Outlying Islands are in fact a group of islands, which includes Palmyra Atoll. None of the islands has any permanent residents - the population consisting of only temporarily stationed scientific and military personnel (316 at the last census!).

Looking at some of the more exotic and far-flung places in the directory reminded me of the island of Tuvalu and how its .tv suffix became quite a popular web domain for businesses in the world of television to adopt.

So how long before the following urls become sought after?

Cape Verde (.cv) – a must for recruitment consultants and headhunters

Croatia/Hrvatska (.hr) – for all Human Resources professionals

Guernsey (.gg) – for jockeys, horse breeders or bookmakers

Iraq (.iq) for Mensa members perhaps

Oman (.om) for practitioners of meditation

And finally Moldova (.md) for Managing Directors

More alternative uses for country code top-level domains will follow in a later blog. In the meantime, please send in any suggestions of your own.

Watching the BBC news this morning, I was outraged by Andy Burnham’s advice, or lack of it, regarding swine flu.  As someone who works in marketing and communications, delivering the right message, to the right person, at the right time, through the right channel is key.  Yet, our health secretary didn’t appear to answer a single straight question for all those baffled by the conflicting advice being propagated by our Government, health officials and other esteemed advisors in the media.  When asked how many people had died as a result of swine flu, who didn’t have previous underlying health problems, the health secretary failed to give the answer - apparently, the BBC news, watched by millions of concerned members of the public before they head out to work, wasn’t the time or place to provide an answer.

So, who should we turn to for answers?  One tip for pregnant women concerned about swine flu was to discuss it with their family.  So, if I have got it right, with the Government unable or unwilling to communicate facts and provide clear direction, pregnant woman are to make decisions based on chit chat, anecdotal stories and gut feelings?

I am sure that I am not alone in thinking that the Government’s communication strategy around swine flu is an exemplary example of how not to do it, am I?