Skip to main content

Hooah Energy Bars and the Troops

A ‘Marketing Conceit’

Regular readers know that transparency is my bête noire. Directly or indirectly, I must have 10 posts that address the issue. But it bears repeating; when it comes to cause-related marketing, don’t try to snooker the customer.

I saw this ad for Hooah Energy Bars in All You magazine, a women’s magazine published for Wal-Mart by Time Inc., and it has some transparency problems.

The ad and the website say, “Every HOOAH bar helps fund research that improves soldier safety, diet, and quality of life.” Promotional material for its liquid companion, HOOAH Soldier Fuel energy drink use similar language.

Supporting the troops sounds great doesn’t it? Especially to people like me with a military background (I was in the Army National Guard).

But that’s not exactly what’s happening here. The formulas for the bar and the drink were licensed by the US Department of Defense to D’Andrea Brothers, LLC, which produces and markets them under the HOOAH name.

In other words, the licensing fees paid by D’Andrea Brothers, LLC apparently go to the Department of Defense labs that originally developed the HOOAH bar and drink and thereby [somehow] benefits soldiers, sailors and Marines.

Let me hasten to add that D’Andrea Brothers, LLC is treading old and familiar ground here.

Every Canadian probably grows up hearing this story but not many others know it. In 1930 three pediatricians at the Hospital for Sick Kids in Toronto invented Pablum, the first vitamin and mineral-enriched pre-cooked baby food. The hospital, the second oldest children’s hospital in North America, licensed Pablum and received royalties for a number of years, which it funneled into research efforts.

But it’s hard to see how benefits will devolve to servicemen and women individually or collectively when you buy HOOAH bars or drinks. Specificity would help. One of the strengths of the breast cancer stamp from the US Postal Service is that you know the money goes to the National Institutes of Health to search for treatments and cures.

What we get from HOOAH are vague generalities about improving diet, safety and quality of life for servicemen and women. This is the weakness of licensing deals as cause-related marketing; because no ‘extra’ money changes hands it muddles the appeal.

I have one other complaint. The packaging and the ad have more visual clichés than a rap video. My foreign readers will probably bemoan all the flag waving in the HOOAH ad. My response is that it plays to its audience. Nonetheless, I would certainly vote for HOOAH to dial it back a little.

Wall Street Journal reporter Amy Chozick called HOOAH’s approach a “marketing conceit,” and that’s well put. Conceit means fanciful. If HOOAH would have relied more on transparency and specificity and less on conceit, this would be a better campaign.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Batting Your Eyelashes at Prescription Drug Cause Marketing

I’m a little chary about making sweeping pronouncements, but I believe I've just seen the first cause marketing promotion in the U.S. involving a prescription drug. The drug is from Allergan and it’s called Latisse , “the first and only FDA-approved prescription treatment for inadequate or not enough eyelashes.” The medical name for this condition is hypotrichosis. Latisse is lifestyle drug the way Viagra or Propecia are. That is, no one’s going to die (except, perhaps, of embarrassment) if their erectile dysfunction or male pattern baldness or thin eyelashes go untreated. Which means the positioning for a product like Latisse is a little tricky. Allergan could have gone with the sexy route as with Viagra or Cialis and showed lovely women batting their new longer, thicker, darker eyelashes. But I’ll bet that approach didn’t test well with women. (I’m reminded of a joke about the Cialis ads from a comedian whose name I can’t recall. He said, “Hey if my erection lasts longer than ...

Cause Marketing: The All Packaging Edition

One way to activate a cause marketing campaign when the sponsor sells a physical product is on the packaging. I started my career in cause marketing on the charity side and I can tell you that back in the day we were thrilled to get a logo on pack of a consumer packaged good (CPG) or even just a mention. Since then, there’s been a welcome evolution of what sponsors are willing and able to do with their packaging in order to activate their cause sponsorships. That said, even today some sponsors don’t seem to have gotten the memo that when it comes to explaining your cause campaign, more really is more, even on something as small as a can or bottle. The savviest sponsors realize that their only guaranteed means of reaching actual customers with a cause marketing message is by putting it on packaging. And the reach and frequency of the media on packaging for certain high-volume CPG items is almost certainly greater than radio, print or outdoor advertising, and, in many cases, TV. More to ...

Chili’s and St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

I was in Chili’s today and I ordered their “Triple-Dipper,” a three appetizer combo. While I waited for the food, I noticed another kind of combo. Chili’s is doing a full-featured cause-related marketing campaign for St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. There was a four-sided laminated table tent outlining the campaign on the table. When the waitress brought the drinks she slapped down Chili’s trademark square paper beverage coasters and on them was a call to action for an element of the campaign called ‘Create-A-Pepper,’ a kind of paper icon campaign. The wait staff was all attired in black shirts co-branded with Chili’s and St. Jude. The Create-A-Pepper paper icon could be found in a stack behind the hostess area. The Peppers are outlines of Chili’s iconic logo meant to be colored. I paid $1 for mine, but they would have taken $5, $10, or more. The crayons, too, were co-branded with the ‘Create-A-Pepper’ and St. Jude’s logos. There’s also creatapepper.com, a microsite, but again wi...