Homemade Pizza Company

Wow, did I ever mess up. Not only did we not get to hear Gordon Montgomery, CMO of HomeMade Pizza Company, speak about his brand, he had a car full of family size cookies to share with the class.

You can learn more about the company on its web site. HomeMade Pizza Company was featured on Oprah in 2006. Here is the segment:



Here is a link to a more recent video from Crain's Chicago Business (3/09) that provides more detail on the company's background and future goals: Video link


Finally, here are some highlights of a Chicago Tribune article from September 2007.

"It's an idea that wasn't even half baked. Eric Fosse was in the diamond business in 1997 when the urge to open a pizza shop overwhelmed him. "We lived in Lake View at the time, and it made sense to us," said Fosse, now 45. "I don't think we thought it through that much. We figured if we sold a great pizza, people would come." He and partner/brother-in-law Matthew Weinstein, 34, then a college business student, and wife Audrey Fosse, 42, put up a few hundred thousand dollars—courtesy of friends and family—and opened the first HomeMade Pizza Co. store in the 1100 block of West Belmont. Diners, who pick up the pizza and bake it at home, went for the "all natural" pie the Chicago company peddled by emphasizing the purchase of locally grown produce. The original store, which the three owners relocated to 3430 N. Southport about four years ago, rang up about $150,000 in the first year. It's on track to do about $600,000 in sales this year. Revenue increased by about 10 percent per year at each shop in the now 16-store company.

It's this time of year, end of summer, that Fosse and crew are thinking a lot about growth. Harvest time sees them buying lots of produce for their pies and salads. The fall is a particularly busy time for the business. Folks who shied away from pizza places in the heat of summer are beginning to return. With the opening of a Homewood location this week, the roster of stores grows to 17. The chain last month opened two stores in Minneapolis; and over the next few weeks joining the fold will be stores in Andersonville, Arlington Heights, Oak Park, and St. Paul and Apple Valley, Minn.
The company will have five stores in the Minneapolis area by the end of the year. Another 20 stores are scheduled for next year, including a Washington, D.C., location. Even the number of owners has increased. The Fosses and Weinstein later welcomed a fourth owner when Glenn Deutsch, 43—who initially helped design the original store, menu and logo and came up with the name—bought in.

It seems their friends recognize a good thing, Fosse said. Brooke Shields, a college buddy of Audrey Fosse's, recently plugged the chain on "The Oprah Winfrey Show." "She likes the products," Eric Fosse said. "We have a lot of friends like that. She just happens to be famous." Such expressed affinity is key for a business that's not the most convenient in its category, said Ron Paul, president of the restaurant and food research firm Technomic Inc. Parking around the stores is a persistent problem, and some customers have difficulty accepting a business model where the patrons of a carry-out pizza joint have to do the baking. "But their customers seem to be very loyal. The word of mouth on them is very favorable," Paul said. The take-and-bake concept has an appeal over that of frozen pizza in that it allows customers to choose their own toppings, and that the pizza is fresher, Paul said. "It's kind of a proven concept," Paul said. "The perception is that its better quality than frozen pizza and better than getting a fully cooked pizza and warming it up later. Freshness is equated to quality."

To make up for the error, Homemade Pizza Company will be the subject of the final exam. Look for the assignment later today.

Notre Dame Brand

Notre Dame is a great brand. It has breadth and depth. It resonates with people who touch it directly and with people who only know it from television or through others.

Today we discussed three strategic dilemmas facing the brand:

1. How should the needs of the various stakeholder groups be balanced? Which group's needs should be given priority? Those who can influence our reputation for research? Or closer in stakeholders like students, faculty and alumni?

2. How important is 'Catholic' as a differentiator for the 'master brand'? Does it deserve top billing or should it be downplayed?


What do you think?

Epilogue: Pepsi Refresh Effort

An article that appeared in Ad Age Feb 8, suggests that 'pass or fail' the effort will be one for the textbooks. Kevin Keller, author of our text, had this comment:

"Pepsi has been wonderful for years at entertaining us," said Kevin Keller, professor of marketing at Dartmouth College. "This [program] is reflective of the times and the realities that people love entertainment but also care and have concerns about the world as a whole. But I would hate to see them stop entertaining us altogether.....Added Mr. Keller, "the one thing becoming more and more true is the importance of cause marketing for any brand, but particularly a brand that has a more youthful target and appeal, which Pepsi clearly has."

The article goes on to say that "in the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl, Pepsi was the second-most discussed advertiser associated with the Super Bowl... according to Nielsen.

MTV Changing its Logo after 30 Years

The change was announced on Monday. Notice the difference? Neither did I at first. The difference is that the logo no longer includes a reference to music. According to The Brandchannel and articles in MSN and Ad Age, the move is intended to align with the fact that MTV is now better known for reality TV shows than music videos. There seem to be at least three different motivations for the change.

1. Align with what we do

The MTV brand has represented more than "music television" for many years, and now – appropriately – the words "music television” are no longer part of the official logo. In addition, the original logo has undergone a slight morphing. When MTV launched, the upside of the logo was that it communicated the very specific, targeted business of the brand to a potential audience that had never heard of it. Of course, the downside of the logo is that once the brand diversified to include material beyond music, such as, say, Jersey Shore shenanigans, the logo became confusing, or even absurd." - The Brandchannel, Feb 10, 2010

2. Better appeal to Millennial target

"It represents a new visually defined MTV, stimulating its past, present and future and embracing its diversity. Everything from Jersey Shore, to the VMAs to collaborations with the MoMA. The logo is part of MTV's re-invention to connect with today's millennial generation and bring them in as part of the channel." -- MSN, Feb 10, 2010

3. Put greater focus on MTV talent

"The new logo is meant to put the focus on MTV's current slate of talent -- the stars of mostly reality shows like "Jersey Shore," "Teen Mom," and "The Buried Life." Since the logo (which seems to have a shorter "M" than the original) is also available in a see-through model, it can change when new stars come into the fold. Tina Exarhos, a spokesperson for MTV's marketing team, explained the change to "The New York Daily News": "If you watch the channel, you've seen that it's definitely going in a new direction. We really wanted to see the logo featured in a new way, and this was really meant to be able to house all the great things that are happening at MTV at any given time." PeaceFM, Feb 10, 2010

4. Increase brand recognition

"Mr. Friedman said MTV has also had a problem with brand recognition among viewers who would love certain shows but had no idea they aired on MTV. "The way the logo frames it makes it a simple reference point," he said.- Ad Age

The move has been questioned on several fronts.
Why now after all these years?
Is it enough of a change? Is tweaking enough?
Should the tagline be replaced?
Is it too mainstream/not irreverent enough?

Based on the case you just read and your experiences with MTV, what do you think?

Microsoft: Can this brand be saved?

Last week a remarkable op ed appeared in the New York Times, authored by a former Microsoft executive (Microsoft's Creative Desstruction), that indicted his former company, as only an insider can, for its suppression of innovation through internecine infighting. You can imagine the splash this made in Redmond.

"Internal competition is common at great companies. It can be wisely encouraged to force ideas to compete. The problem comes when the competition becomes uncontrolled and destructive. Microsoft, it has created a dysfunctional corporate culture in which the big established groups are allowed to prey upon emerging teams, belittle their efforts, compete unfairly against them for resources, and over time hector them out of existence. It’s not an accident that almost all the executives in charge of Microsoft’s music, e-books, phone, online, search and tablet efforts over the past decade have left."

Adding insult to injury, the Brandamentalist, David Ansett, posted this scathing indictment of the Microsoft brand this week on his blog based on consumer associations as reflected by BrandTags.

I forwarded the New York Times article to our speaker, Kate Mulcahy. Here's what Kate had to say.

There are some painful lessons for all large companies and the challenges that comes with success. I agree that change has to start with the top leaders attitude and actions. And at times, it means having the courage to replace the CEO, as with McDonald's from 7-8 years ago. In 2003 MCD stock was just above $12 per share and McD's was no longer relevant to consumers. McD's learned a lot from performance problems and it clearly taught many of us humility. It also taught senior leadership to never take success for granted. As Carol knows, the simplest analysis of what went wrong is the lack of focus on 3 brand-building basics: 1) Renovation,
2) Innovation and 3) Marketing. Creativity was not a supply issue, it was a demand issue. By the way, MCD stock is currently around $60 a share.

My question for the class is whether the Microsoft brand is irretrievably tarnished or whether, like McDonald's, it's possible to recover greatness? What do you think? What would it take?

Super Brands in Super Bowl

Let the hype begin. With nearly 150 million viewers, the Super Bowl is the marketing event of the year, with some of the best and worst thinking brand marketers have to offer on display. Marketers can make news simply by NOT advertising in the Super Bowl (Fedex, Pepsi, GM). Others are making news by how they leverage their $2.5-$3.0 investment outside of the event itself.

What sometimes is lost is the strategy impetus for promoting the brand in this high profile way. Does the Super Bowl offer a unique opportunity to build equity with customers and prospects? This Ad Age article provides some interesting perspective on brands favored by the fans of each competing team. Even more interesting, the brands favored by likely watchers compared to non-watchers.

"That anticipated audience may be big, but it's still not even half the country. So who are all those holdouts? According to ARS they over-index both as white and African-American. They're less likely to have children. Some 67% are female, and they tend to dislike advertising more than average. People in the West are also more likely not to watch, which isn't surprising given that the NFL abandoned Los Angeles years ago."

"Likely watchers are also predominantly iPhone users and over-index for Budweiser, which is a good thing given it's the game's biggest advertiser. Non-watchers prefer Sam Adams and Coors and the Droid. Watchers like Ford and GMC. Non-watchers like Honda, Nissan and Toyota. In general, Super Bowl watchers tend to overindex as loyalists of American car brands, while non-watchers overindex for foreign makes."

Which brand(s) do you think are using their $3.0 million or more investment strategically to support their business and brand objectives? Which are not?