- Extremely mild
- Richly foaming
- Naturally gentle
- Deeply cleanses
- Nourishes
- Pure and soothing
- Synergistically
- Refresh and restore
- Skin radiance
- Cool soothing
- Protects and restores balance
- Harmonize and replenish
- Additional moisturizing benefit
What doesn’t this stuff do? Lather up and this naturally gentle, richly foaming, pure and soothing nourishing cleanser will synergistically refresh, harmonize, replenish, protect and restore balance with cool soothing botanicals.
Kinda ridiculous, isn’t it? Reading this should remind you to read your own site, your own marketing copy, your own definitions.
What claims are you making? Do you really believe them? What are you saying? Does it make any sense? How are you describing your product? Is it accurate or just a sea of adjectives that look good and sound good together? What story are you telling or selling? Whatever it turns out to be, are you really OK with it? Deep down inside, is it something you’re proud of?
Darcy Fitzpatrick
on 08 Feb 10“Our most advanced technology in a magical and revolutionary device at an unbelieveable price.”
jonathan
on 08 Feb 10haha “extremely mild?”
reminds me of when i was in college and the school newspaper ran a story accusing one of my friends of “stirring up apathy.”
Jeremy at MicroExperience
on 08 Feb 10This sounds like a product package that was designed by a committee, and they forgot the editing process after all the ideas were in. By trying to be all things to all people, they ended up with a whole lot of words that don’t really mean anything to anyone. I bet the manufacturer would sell a lot more if they just picked the top 2 or 3 benefits that actually matter to customers, and focused the messaging on those instead.
On a side note, it’s rather funny to see that “synergize” - possibly the most meaningless word in all of tech marketing - has found its way to consumer products, too.
Emil Ivanov
on 08 Feb 10Post a la Seth Godin. Very nice. :)
Vince LaVecchia
on 08 Feb 10A good reminder to apply some truthiness to our marketing.
Mat Chavez
on 08 Feb 10http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeXAcwriid0
^ Perfect example.
Anonymous Coward
on 08 Feb 10also kinda ridiculous – buying $6 soap. they can charge $6 for it because they have those words on it.
Rich
on 08 Feb 10Looks like somebody forgot to bring a magazine into the bathroom with them this morning.
JF
on 08 Feb 10Looks like somebody forgot to bring a magazine into the bathroom with them this morning.
Completely accurate.
MKinLA
on 08 Feb 10That’s one more reason I love Method. In a category where this kind of meaningless manifest of flowery attributes is the norm, Method talks to the consumer like a wry friend. From the back of a Method bottle of White Tea natural hand wash:
And then there’s this genius commercial, which pulls off the clever hat trick of making you want to buy their products for everything they’re not – while never even mentioning their product.Dean
on 08 Feb 10True, and as a marketer, I agree, with your point. Keep in mind, however, that somewhere along the way, someone BOUGHT this soap. And if you were reading it in the bathroom, it was someone in your organization or household. They probably chose it because it was next to a bottle of soap that did not have as many adjectives on it.
Also, it is probably from P&G, and they are genius marketers. There may be something valuable on that bottle of soap. Maybe in it as well.
The real question is: Did you wash your hands when you were done?
Graham
on 08 Feb 10Having spent some time with THE LADIEESSS, I have a strong suspicion that this is not a marketing failure. No doubt this kind of puffery does in fact sell more hand soap. Don’t forget, not everyone in the world responds to the “SIMPLE AND NO B.S.” mantra that 37sig & its readership espouse (sad as that may be…)
Imagine the type of consumer who buys 4 celebrity magazines a week. Are they the “Getting Real” type? Or the “Harmonize and replenish blah blah blah” type? The latter, I’d guess, and that’s exactly who these soaps are targeted at.
thomas
on 08 Feb 10if you thought the soap was bad… take a look
http://www.foodpolitics.com/2009/12/fda-is-on-the-job/
http://www.foodpolitics.com/2009/11/kelloggs-withdraws-immunity-claim/
Ed
on 08 Feb 10All you really need to do is tell a quick story to relate to folks problem, and offer a real solution http://bit.ly/c0S7qi
Richard Bird
on 08 Feb 10We have been battling for clarity and focus (aka simplicity) in consumer packaging and labeling for decades, here. And, I am pleased to report that the tide is turning, despite the example made in this post.
More of our CPGC clients (large and small, local and international) are beginning to appreciate the marketing and aesthetic advantages of less versus more.
Darren
on 09 Feb 10Ha—what was the handsoap? I use an Ayurvedic, $1.99 at wholefoods.
Wonder if the descriptions are accurate!?
Olivier Faurax
on 09 Feb 10I would bet it is some kind of PNL. And you know, ladies loves this type of things. It’s not the soap that is important, it’s the emotion it creates when you choose/use it.
This discussion is closed.