Smoke Gets In Their Eyes

Burger King is trying to throw more raw meat on the grill by redirecting marketing funds normally spent by franchisees, and using it to run more corporate branding.  We're talking $25 million next year, and $40 million every year through 2022. 

Its National Franchise Association, which represents the vast majority of those franchisees, has filed two lawsuits to stop it.  As I possess friend of the Whopper status, I'd like to submit a brief in support of the complaints.

The dynamic between "corporate" and "the field" has always been dicey when it comes to spending marketing money.  Headquarters like to focus on communicating the brand, and other long-term things that, arguably, the mother ship should worry about.  The field -- whether franchisees, dealerships, or stores of any kind -- have more immediate, short-term interests at heart...namely, selling stuff this afternoon.  Finding an uneasy middle-ground is how most marketing campaigns get realized.

Burger King has made such detente impossible.  Lately, it has aggressively pursued some of the most notable, expensive, and utterly pointless branding the world has ever seen. 

Campaigns on Facebook.  Edgy videos, like "Whopper Virgins," scripted and shot to be forwarded via email.  An entire campaign and website dedicated to a cologne that smells like broiled meat.  Bikini-clad BK Girls in New Zealand.  And the incessant, widespread appearances of its creepy mascot, in everything from television spots, to video games and Halloween masks.

This is a company that, back in 2006, decided that its corporate marketing mandate was to "participate in the collective conversation," and has pioneered many inventive, edgy ways to get consumers to interact with its brand.  In fact, it has helped define the wonderfully circular school of thought that says the purpose of branding is to get people to interact with your branding.

It just doesn’t sell Whoppers.  Hence the lawsuit.

While Burger King has been receiving accolades from inside the branding fishbowl, the business of retailing burnt cow and potatoes has been decided by product development, menu offerings, store cleanliness, service quality, price, and all the less-sexy things that bore creative marketers, but actually matter to hungry customers.  McDonald's has out-performed Burger King during some of the quarters in which the nonsense branding activities peaked...by focusing on those very things that drive consumption. 

There's no connection between Burger King's participation in the supposed "collective conversation," and any sales or profits.  The franchisees must know this, just like they know that no business can survive if all its customers do is think about its products. 

Reality matters, no matter how expertly the branding gurus have worked to obscure (or ignore) this fact.

Of course, the lawsuits could be the result of the operators wanting to keep the cash to spend on their own pet projects instead of those at corporate.  They're not inherently going to be smarter or better at making marketing decisions, per se.

But the best brands are built by a real integration and, gasp, recognition and coordination of business strategy and communications.  Branding run amok, however brilliantly it prompts impromptu and passing conversation, doesn't build anything except the bank accounts of those responsible for creating it.  Generally, it's a tax on those who are tasked with earning it.

Maybe the franchisees are finally seeing through the smoke, and want to use marketing dollars to sell more hamburgers (and build the brand accordingly)?

Comments

[Denise Lee Yohn]

in addition to the great points about bk itself, your post also points to distorted the view from "inside the branding fishbowl" can be.

just a couple of months ago, ad age featured an interview with bk's cmo, russ klein -- http://tinyurl.com/busllj -- the love-fest extolled klein and his bold, risky marketing moves.

but now we know the business story behind the marketing hype -- according to businessweek, bk revenues fell dramatically in march and remained weak in many markets in april -- http://tinyurl.com/pgek23.

[Cincinnati Wednesday]

And what I meant to add above (and just remembered last night that I forgot) was that since I'm not a fan of the BK product, they're REALLY not convincing someone like me to give them another try with this horrible "Burger King" campaign. He's a monster turn-off in every respect. (The food is the thing, Burger King! Those poor franchisees!)

[The Brand Man]

Enjoyed this piece immensely. I just discovered you and your blog today....(sorry to be late to the party)...I have forwarded this BK story to a client of mine as "another opinion" on the social media debate and keeping branding relevant and meaningful to consumers...Many marketers misuse the term relevant these days IMO.

[Michelle Batten]

Jonathan -

Agree that Burger King seems to have lost its way on the digital road. Clever and innovative campaigns may score you points when you are first trying to get consumers attention - but they don't hold up when it comes to doing substantive business with customers on a daily basis. The franchisee owners clearly understand this point, but somehow the brand/agency team is failing to address it. The McDonald's quarterly sales performance you cited says it all.

- Michelle Batten
@iMWConnect

[Cincinnati Wednesday]

I'm not a big fan of Burger King's burgers ... AND I really can't stand that creeeeepy King! Is he one of the WORST "corporate mascots" ever, or what?!

[Jay Ehret]

The corporate/franchisee battle is ages old and happens across all industries. In this instance, one must side with the franchisees. How can anyone call the Burger King corporate campaign "branding?"

[Charlene]

Rah! Rah! I've long admired BK's ability to be everywhere on the 'net...but have also wondered when they would start selling hamburgers and french fries. I stopped eating BK Whoppers and 'any way I want it' burgers when the creepy mascot came in to our lives. (Okay, I slipped once and purchased a burger two years ago while on the road).

I hope the lawsuit tells headquarters to stop and remember their customers - not the franchisees, the people who actually purchase the product:)