‍

03:32.910 --> 03:44.650

Pip Bingemann: Alright, we might get into it. I'm sure there's gonna be heaps of people coming through, because there's, like, 150-odd who have said yes, but they'll come through. So I'm gonna introduce James.

03:44.840 --> 03:59.550

Pip Bingemann: The reason why we're late is that, I was saying to James, I am disgusted by how successful he is. It seems that everything James touches turns to gold. He's had an incredible career in the advertising world.

03:59.600 --> 04:17.099

Pip Bingemann: He's had a big hand in a bunch of other startups, like Trucksuit, ideally. There's a new PR company coming out of that little neck of the woods over in New Zealand as well, which I'm sure James has had a touch… a play in. And he's also written four books.

04:17.350 --> 04:34.549

Pip Bingemann: And so, this is his, fourth book, which I'm super excited to hear about and learn more, because, for me personally, I remember, trying to tell everyone about this book when it first came out back in… mid-2015s? Early 2010s, maybe?

04:34.690 --> 04:54.479

Pip Bingemann: To the point that I actually… I should have brought this slide up. I sent James a slide the other day of a picture of him, which was probably 15 years ago, from an old training deck that I had, and I said, is this really you? And it's quite funny. So, like, it's kind of cool, not only to chat with James and to know him on a couple of different dimensions,

04:54.480 --> 05:07.109

Pip Bingemann: But he's had such a massive, I think, positive impact in the industry that we all know and love, and so it's cool to kind of talk through, from the man himself, about the latest book that's coming out.

05:07.260 --> 05:26.010

Pip Bingemann: And so, that's what we're going to do today. And so, as a quick reminder, these SPARC sessions, they're not supposed to be about AI, they're not supposed to be about anything else other than helping people develop their own craft and their own taste, and their own, knowledge into making better work.

05:26.010 --> 05:37.729

Pip Bingemann: And so it's really nice to kick the second one off with James at whatever hour of the day it is, 6am over here in Sydney, I think it's probably 8am over in New Zealand, and maybe…

05:37.830 --> 05:51.990

Pip Bingemann: 3 or 4 over in the States, PM. So we're probably missing a lot of people from Europe at the moment, but, that's what happens when we've got weird time zones. And so we'll kick into it, and then, it's gonna go for about 20 or 30 minutes. There's gonna be heaps of questions.

05:52.290 --> 06:06.430

Pip Bingemann: And so, as you have questions, please, please, please throw them in the chat. We're gonna have a bunch of books to give away to a bunch of people as well, and so, we will pick some people and send them a book.

06:06.580 --> 06:26.290

Pip Bingemann: At the post about… I think it's either going to be random, or you might get an extra lottery ticket if you put in a comment. But I don't know the mechanics, so it's not a… it's a game of chance, it's not a game of skill, for the T's and C's. All right, so, without saying anything else, I'll throw it to James, we'll get into it, and I'll shut up, and then you'll hear from me when we get into questions. Peace.

06:27.460 --> 06:49.340

James Hurman: Amazing, thank you, Pip, and hello, everyone. It's lovely to be with you on this. It's quite a cold, grey morning here in Auckland this morning, and a little bit past 8 o'clock, so I've had my coffee, so hopefully I'll be, you know, semi-articulate. I'm going to talk about my latest book, which is called Future Demand. The book is about the…

06:49.340 --> 07:04.130

James Hurman: The… the relationship between performance marketing and brand marketing, and why marketing to people who aren't gonna buy from us straight away is one of the most important forms of marketing that we can do.

07:04.690 --> 07:16.339

James Hurman: And and the world is full of, of, of woe and scary, scary statistics at the moment, so I'll just add a few to, to that pile.

07:16.340 --> 07:28.650

James Hurman: We… some research last year showed that, we're beginning to hit, in… in large organizations, a kind of performance plateau. 75% of US marketers.

07:28.650 --> 07:46.309

James Hurman: report experiencing diminishing returns on their performance marketing spend. We've been through an amazing past, sort of, decade, 15 years of the growth of digital and performance marketing, used that for all it is worth, and done a lot of great work in that space, and made marketing

07:46.310 --> 07:59.139

James Hurman: You know, in many ways, a lot more efficient and much more effective in terms of driving immediate sales, but we're starting to see that plateau out, and the more money we put into the performance machine.

07:59.140 --> 08:08.310

James Hurman: Rather than seeing, kind of, escalating growth, we're seeing escalating costs of acquisition, and, and lower and lower, kind of, returns back from

08:08.310 --> 08:12.369

James Hurman: The, the extra amounts that we put into our performance marketing

08:12.630 --> 08:37.310

James Hurman: 66% of marketers now say that their performance campaign metrics look successful on dashboards, yet fail to deliver any real growth. So, what we're being told by the data versus what our brands are actually experiencing, if we look at an annualized growth, kind of basis, very different things. And… and this amazing stat from the US, US brands now use an

08:37.309 --> 08:47.719

James Hurman: lose an average of $29 for every new customer acquired. And so, the amount that we're putting into the acquisition machine versus the amount that we're getting out is, is faltering.

08:48.160 --> 09:06.999

James Hurman: And… and I'm going to talk about why this is, and give you kind of a diagnosis and a way out of this trap, but… but we're beginning as a community to kind of right ourselves, and at the end of last year, the top regret for US marketers was over-indexing on short-term tactics over long-term brand building.

09:07.000 --> 09:31.209

James Hurman: The book's aimed at the US, and so I'm using U.S. statistics here, but this pattern we see kind of everywhere in the world, right? It's not something which is particular to the US. And the pendulum swing away from sort of such a focus on short-term and back towards a bit of a bit more of a focus on the long-term is something that I'm also sensing everywhere in the world, and it's a very good thing to be happening.

09:31.210 --> 09:33.409

James Hurman: And we're right to be doing that.

09:33.880 --> 09:39.450

James Hurman: to be kind of moving back to a balance, this is an excellent study that was, that was carried out by Google.

09:39.450 --> 09:58.069

James Hurman: and their research partners last year, it's called the Effectiveness Equation. What they were able to do is look at companies, the amount that they, the amount that they allocated, the amount of budget they allocated toward brand marketing versus performance marketing, and also look at an annualized ROI of that total spend overall. So…

09:58.420 --> 10:08.920

James Hurman: Rather than, you know, we're too sort of obsessed with looking at ROI on a per-channel basis, or on a per campaign basis, the most important metric, is, of course.

10:08.920 --> 10:20.950

James Hurman: the total ROI from our total marketing spend, if we're a CMO or someone who's in charge of a brand, what's important is how much are we getting back from everything that we do, not just how much are we getting back from individual

10:20.950 --> 10:23.229

James Hurman: individual activities, so…

10:23.550 --> 10:38.860

James Hurman: what this chart shows pretty clearly is that the brands that led heavily towards either performance or brand were, experiencing a lower overall ROI than those that balanced brand and performance about 50-50.

10:38.880 --> 10:55.759

James Hurman: And this isn't a bunch of, sort of, you know, brand enthusiastic CPG companies, this is e-commerce retailers, and so this is modern digital companies, and what Google found was the optimal split between performance and brand in those companies was about half and half.

10:56.280 --> 11:10.249

James Hurman: Now, this, Google's not alone. Analytic partners in the US, found a similar thing, so they looked at incremental revenue growth across companies, looked at what they allocated towards brand versus performance, and they saw, again, that those

11:10.250 --> 11:28.990

James Hurman: those splitting their budgets about half and half were much more effective in terms of driving incremental growth over the short term and the medium term and the longer term, than brands that went all in on performance or leant very heavily towards performance. So, a couple of data points there saying the same two things.

11:28.990 --> 11:41.220

James Hurman: Not new news for anyone who's been following the effectiveness dialogue over the past, past couple of decades. Way back now in the dark ages of 2013, Lisbon and Peterfield and the IPA.

11:41.220 --> 11:52.810

James Hurman: Showed that in their data set, the optimal split between what they called brand and sales activation, this was before the term performance marketing had been kind of invented, was 60-40.

11:53.190 --> 12:08.929

James Hurman: And and so, back then, they saw the companies that were spending 40% of their budgets driving short-term, immediate kind of returns, measurable, visible, immediate sales, were doing the best, not the ones that were spending all of their money on that sort of activity.

12:09.180 --> 12:18.460

James Hurman: And what a lot of marketers don't know is that even further back, if we go back to 1992, there was a guy called Peter Kim in New York City.

12:18.700 --> 12:35.509

James Hurman: worked with a very big database of U.S. marketing data. He, too, could see what brands split out in terms of their brand advertising and their promotional activity. So, again, activity designed to drive very visible, very measurable, very immediate sales.

12:35.510 --> 12:44.479

James Hurman: And he found the same thing. The companies spending about half and half saw a much greater overall ROI than the companies that were leaning into promotion.

12:44.480 --> 12:48.379

James Hurman: Which was the performance marketing of old. And…

12:48.830 --> 13:08.730

James Hurman: you know, doing a lot, a lot lower ROI if they were leaning too hard into promotion and not balancing those things properly. So, it's really interesting when we take a tour through, kind of, very recent history and, and, and very, kind of, as far as marketing concerns, is concerned, very, you know, deep history.

13:08.730 --> 13:30.750

James Hurman: It doesn't matter where or when we look. Whenever anyone looks at this, whenever anyone's able to get the allocations between budget and brand across many brands and look at that, and measure that against the overall ROI, the overall growth or performance of those brands, the companies with the best overall marketing ROI spend about half and half on brand and performance.

13:30.880 --> 13:40.909

James Hurman: That was true in the early 90s, it was still true in the 2010s, it's still true today, and it doesn't matter what category or what geography we look at, it's always true.

13:41.480 --> 13:47.760

James Hurman: And… and my, my interest, my fascination has been, why is this?

13:48.350 --> 13:52.880

James Hurman: Right, why do these two forms of marketing interact in this very…

13:52.880 --> 14:17.689

James Hurman: predictable way, right? What we see… what the data I just talked you through is what in marketing science we call a generalizable pattern. What that means is we see that same passion come up again and again. When we look at different data sets from different time periods, different geographies, different groups of companies, different researchers using different methodologies. We see the same pattern where it's hit again and again and again, and that's how we know that something is

14:17.790 --> 14:21.060

James Hurman: a robust kind of principle to follow. So…

14:21.320 --> 14:39.920

James Hurman: So why? Why are brand marketing and performance marketing both really powerful on their own? Because they're both, in all sorts of ways, very valuable, powerful forms of marketing, but why are they more powerful when they're put together? How does this thing… how does this kind of whole caboodle work?

14:40.060 --> 14:41.670

James Hurman: And the answer to that

14:42.210 --> 14:57.410

James Hurman: it's… the answer is found by going back to what marketing is kind of fundamentally about. Marketing is fundamentally about how markets work, it's marketing, and about how humans make decisions. And once we understand those two

14:57.410 --> 15:15.850

James Hurman: things, it becomes really kind of clear why branded performance work in the way that they do, and why they work so well together, and why the other results that we see from different types of marketing and advertising activity, why those are the way that they are.

15:15.850 --> 15:40.449

James Hurman: So, I'm going to talk to you a little bit about… about this. I want to start with how markets work. So, this is really hard to do on a call like this. This is an exercise that I do when I stand up in front of big crowds. I'll always say, put up your hand if you're currently in the process of buying a new mobile phone, or thinks, or think you will do so in the next couple of weeks. And say I'm in a room with 100 people, one or two people will put their hand up to indicate that they are

15:40.450 --> 15:43.109

James Hurman: We're in the process of buying a new mobile phone.

15:43.110 --> 15:50.870

James Hurman: Then what I do is I say, okay, put your hand up if you expect to buy a new mobile phone in the next 2 years, and almost everyone puts up their hand.

15:50.870 --> 16:10.379

James Hurman: And I do that exercise to make a really fundamental point that in any market, there are two types of demand. So, there's what I call current demand, which is the small group of hands that always goes up first, people who are in the market, currently ready to buy, currently shopping the category.

16:10.390 --> 16:22.110

James Hurman: And then there's what I call future demand, which is the much larger group of hands, which is people who aren't looking to buy right now, but who will definitely come into the category at some point in the relatively near future.

16:22.110 --> 16:33.299

James Hurman: And as marketers, we've, it pays to understand that this is how markets work, this is how all markets work, and we've got a job to do as marketers with both of these groups of people.

16:34.370 --> 16:59.090

James Hurman: as my very scientific hands-up exercise always shows, the current demand in any market is always a lot smaller than the future demand, so there's always a small group of people in the market right now, at any given point in time, and a much larger group of people who are out of that market. They will buy from that market at some point in the future, but they're just not in the market shopping around today.

17:00.370 --> 17:02.720

James Hurman: So, I took my,

17:03.320 --> 17:25.020

James Hurman: I took my, my audience experiment, and I turned it into some actual research, and the US did a representative national sample study of consumers in the US. Asked them about a bunch of categories. When do you intend to purchase a new mobile smartphone handset? Is it in the next week, month, quarter, six months, year?

17:25.560 --> 17:29.270

James Hurman: Sometime after that, and measured what they said, and so…

17:29.270 --> 17:49.220

James Hurman: You can see here, in smartphones, pretty, pretty similar to what I was saying before, a small amount who are in the smartphone market this month, 15% say they're looking for a new smartphone or gonna buy one in the next month, and the 85% are going to buy a new smartphone at some point after that.

17:49.390 --> 18:00.910

James Hurman: This is pretty consistent across categories. If we look at sneakers, people like to buy sneakers a little more often than they buy new smartphones, and so the shape is slightly different, but it's still fundamentally the same principle.

18:00.950 --> 18:10.159

James Hurman: a small group of about a quarter in market for a new pair of sneakers over the next month. The much larger group will buy sneakers at some point in the future.

18:10.640 --> 18:17.119

James Hurman: If we look at international air travel, see a really similar pattern, 19% current demand, 81% future demand.

18:17.120 --> 18:41.310

James Hurman: If we think about much faster moving categories, so FMCG, CPG categories, it's probably fair to say that people are in the market if they're intending to buy something from that category this week, as opposed to this month. If we look at beer, we see that 37% of people are going to buy beer this week. 63% of beer drinkers and buyers will not buy beer this week.

18:41.310 --> 18:44.949

James Hurman: We'll buy it at some point, in the period following that.

18:45.830 --> 18:55.499

James Hurman: And if we look at a relatively new, but really interesting category, recreational cannabis, we see the same thing, 31% current demand, 69% future demand.

18:55.960 --> 19:19.449

James Hurman: some people getting high this week, most people getting high later. So, the pattern holds across, it doesn't matter what category you look at, this pattern holds across those categories. This is a fundamental about how markets work, right? They have a small amount of buyers in them at any given point in time, and a massive amount of buyers who will come into them later. This is how all markets work, all categories work.

19:19.460 --> 19:40.080

James Hurman: There's no category where people are in the market to buy from that category every day, or 100% of people are in that category to buy at any given point in time. Markets always have this dynamic, this shape, and it pays for us to understand that as marketers, because we're in the game of marketing, and that's about how markets work. So…

19:40.320 --> 19:56.290

James Hurman: if that's how markets work, then how do humans make decisions within those markets? And there's a really excellent piece of research that came out of WPP Media and Saeed Business School at Oxford University late last year called How Humans Decide.

19:56.290 --> 20:16.210

James Hurman: And this is a study where they looked at 1.2 million purchase journeys, so people who were out of the market, came into the market, made a purchase, then left that market again, and they were able to study what happened in that journey. And what they found, and what this chart shows, is that on average, 84% of people

20:16.390 --> 20:23.729

James Hurman: chose a brand, when they purchased, they chose a brand that they were already biased towards before they came into the market.

20:23.730 --> 20:44.410

James Hurman: So, they had a consideration set of brands that they were, you know, most favorable about buying to before they came into the market. They came into the market, they evaluated all of their options, so those brands that they were familiar with and biased towards, alongside all of the other brands that had, you know, all sorts of different product offers and promotions and all that kind of stuff.

20:44.990 --> 21:09.929

James Hurman: And 84% of the time, they ended up choosing something that was on that original consideration set. So we, this is fascinating, and really breaks with the idea that if we just put the right amount… right sort of marketing, the most persuasive argument for our product in front of people when they come into market, they're likely to choose us. Well, no, they're not. They're actually still likely to choose something that they already felt good about before they came into market.

21:09.930 --> 21:11.679

James Hurman: already biased towards.

21:11.680 --> 21:21.139

James Hurman: And this is the truth about how humans make decisions. When they come into a market, they gravitate towards the brands that they feel most familiar with. We have a bias

21:21.140 --> 21:34.010

James Hurman: within us, which is a familiarity bias that biases us towards things that are familiar. We like and trust and choose things that feel more familiar to us. In the

21:34.010 --> 21:43.020

James Hurman: In the behavioral science, they call this the mere exposure effect, that we tend to like things merely because we've been exposed to them before.

21:43.020 --> 21:56.229

James Hurman: If we've seen something before, if we've kind of had an experience with something before, we're more likely to like it than something that we've never seen, something that's fresh and completely new and completely unfamiliar to us.

21:57.360 --> 22:13.860

James Hurman: And this is why brands like Coca-Cola do these sorts of activities. So Coke branding every convenience store in the world is not so much about reminding you of Coke, so that when you walk into that store, you buy a Coke. Actually, its much bigger impact is that

22:13.860 --> 22:26.869

James Hurman: this marketing keeps us feeling familiar with Coke at all times, so it's very difficult for us to walk through any big city in the world without seeing the Coke logo a bunch of times.

22:27.090 --> 22:51.950

James Hurman: what happens when we see that logo is our kind of familiarity with Coke, our sort of memory that Coke is something that's around us and in our world all the time, is continually topped up. What Coke's doing here, I call familiarity infrastructure. They're making sure that the Coke brand never gets unfamiliar to anyone, and it's one of the reasons why, in a very, in a really, really competitive category with a very low

22:51.950 --> 22:59.349

James Hurman: price of entry, Coke has maintained its market leadership for decades and decades and decades. Part of that

22:59.350 --> 23:04.569

James Hurman: is the fact that Coke is always the most familiar brand to all of us in the soft drink world.

23:05.230 --> 23:22.319

James Hurman: So this is how humans make decisions. As people come into a market, they come with a powerful bias toward a small number of brands that usually results in them choosing one of those brands, and this often happens regardless of whether there is an objectively better product available from a brand they're not biased towards.

23:22.320 --> 23:27.880

James Hurman: Now, this is, in a classic economic sense, irrational behavior. Why would we choose something

23:27.880 --> 23:41.809

James Hurman: that is inferior when a superior choice is available to us. And the reality is that, as behavioral science has shown us, we are predictably irrational creatures. We have brains that make decisions based on

23:41.810 --> 23:49.279

James Hurman: you know, the subconscious biases that we have, and then rationalize those decisions. We don't really have rational brains, we have rationalizing brains.

23:49.290 --> 23:50.529

James Hurman: And…

23:51.150 --> 24:02.109

James Hurman: What this means for marketing is when we make people familiar with our brand before they enter the category, they're biased to act on the marketing that we do to drive immediate sales.

24:02.110 --> 24:17.669

James Hurman: These two things go together, this kind of warming up and biasing of people towards our brand before they come into market, and then our marketing to drive immediate sales, which closes the deal when they arrive in the category.

24:17.670 --> 24:32.979

James Hurman: At one of my company's Tracksuit, we, we decided to put this theory to the test, and, and so this idea that if people are more familiar with a brand, they're more likely to act on its, on its short-term marketing, its marketing to drive immediate sales.

24:33.130 --> 24:47.400

James Hurman: We, so Tracksuit is a brand health tracker. We track awareness and consideration and preference and those sorts of things for now thousands of brands around the world. We took our brand, brand health data, we gave a bunch of it to TikTok.

24:48.250 --> 24:58.280

James Hurman: they say you should never give TikTok your data, but we did in this particular case, but it came with some very clear stipulations, of course. But anyway, the marketing science team at TikTok

24:58.280 --> 25:11.939

James Hurman: took our brand awareness data and compared that against their performance marketing data. So, did those companies with higher or lower brand awareness see any differing performance efficiency?

25:11.940 --> 25:20.490

James Hurman: And what this chart shows here, this very messy chart, basically this is showing that there's no observable correlation between

25:20.530 --> 25:33.809

James Hurman: click-through rate and brand awareness. So, what that means is you can be the most familiar brand in the world, you can be Coca-Cola, or you can be a brand that no one's ever heard of. If you make a cracking bit of content on TikTok, people will click on it.

25:33.900 --> 25:37.999

James Hurman: But, marketers, we are not here to drive clicks.

25:38.100 --> 25:54.270

James Hurman: Click-through rate has been now proven several times in several different studies to have no relationship with any kind of important business metrics. Click-through rate does not matter. It's a pure vanity metric, and we shouldn't pay much attention to it at all.

25:55.080 --> 26:10.589

James Hurman: But what does matter is conversion rate. That's what we're here to do, drive conversions, drive sales, grow the business. And so, if we look at the correlation between awareness and conversion rate, we see a very strong correlation. As awareness gets higher, so does conversion rate.

26:11.320 --> 26:34.990

James Hurman: And the differences are very meaningful. If you're a brand with 40% awareness, your conversion rate's going to be about 1.5 times a 20% awareness brand. If you're a brand with 60% awareness, your conversion rate's going to be nearly three times as high as if you've only got 20% awareness. So this is some evidence that shows that if brands have done the job of kind of building familiarity among lots of people.

26:35.060 --> 26:55.049

James Hurman: before they come into market. When they do, they tend to buy, click on the performance marketing, buy something from that journey. And so, conversion rate is really, is not so much a factor of how good the performance marketing is. Conversion rate is actually more a factor of how good the brand marketing is.

26:55.050 --> 27:06.069

James Hurman: If we're a brand that's done a lot of great brand work, we've made ourselves very familiar to a lot of the market, we're gonna see better conversion rates from doing that. And so…

27:06.740 --> 27:31.720

James Hurman: And so this really kind of proved out this thesis that making our brand more well-known makes our performance marketing more efficient and more effective. If we want more efficient performance marketing, we should not try and, you know, twiddle the knobs and try and make that performance marketing more efficient within itself. We should actually look at what we're doing on the brand side of our marketing and make sure that we're growing our awareness, self-familiarity.

27:31.720 --> 27:44.020

James Hurman: growing our brand in that sense to make our performance marketing more efficient and more effective. And that really argues, with one of the sort of principles that we've grown up on, this idea that

27:44.020 --> 27:54.809

James Hurman: ads work and are more effective because they're more persuasive. If we look at the most familiar brands in the world, the Apples and the Nikes and the Coca-Cola's, they actually don't take

27:54.810 --> 28:03.860

James Hurman: the lion's share of sales because their ads are more persuasive. Their ads actually work better because their brands are so much more familiar to so many people.

28:03.860 --> 28:28.459

James Hurman: And one of the really interesting bits of research that's been done, I think three times now over the past 20 or so years by Paul Dyson is the multipliers of profit ROI in advertising. And the number one is brand size, right? If you're a bigger brand, you have an immediate effectiveness advantage, just because lots more people are familiar with you, and so they're more likely to

28:28.580 --> 28:35.170

James Hurman: convert from the ads that you do, which are a bit more short-term, or a bit more product or offer-based.

28:35.350 --> 28:50.679

James Hurman: And this really argues with something that we've grown up believing, which is this idea that advertising works by causing sales, by putting the right argument for our product in front of the right people. This idea that this is how advertising works

28:50.680 --> 28:59.989

James Hurman: Eventually, it originally came out in 19… it was the very early 1900s. A guy called Frank Dukesmith, invented the concept of ADA.

29:00.480 --> 29:24.030

James Hurman: And Frank was actually not an advertising or a marketing person, he was a salesperson. His discipline was sales, it wasn't marketing. And he said a good sales process involves creating awareness for whatever you're selling, generating interest in that, causing desire for that, and finally prompting action and getting someone across the line to buy.

29:24.240 --> 29:43.559

James Hurman: And this was subsequently picked up by a group of advertising, early, sort of, 1900s advertising people, and adopted as a way to explain how advertising worked and what a good ad did. That an ad caused sales by putting the right argument for our product in front of the right people.

29:43.710 --> 30:03.230

James Hurman: And this was based on a model not of how advertising works, but a model of how sales works. And it was a great model to explain how sales works, but a terrible model to explain the completely different discipline of advertising. And the reason that we know that advertising doesn't work in this way

30:03.500 --> 30:14.350

James Hurman: let me take you through some numbers. If we look at the conversion rates of advertising, the overall kind of conversion rates looking across, across lots of different media and types of advertising.

30:14.350 --> 30:28.309

James Hurman: conversion rates are never over 15%. They're sometimes up to 5% in really strong cases, and they're usually around 1%, right? So normally, advertising results in about 1% of the people that have seen the ad.

30:28.310 --> 30:46.450

James Hurman: go out and buy the product. And sometimes, in very rare cases, that's up to, kind of, 15%, or there or thereabouts. But it's never higher than that, right? And the interesting thing about these numbers is, if you go back 100 years, these numbers were exactly the same. So.

30:46.970 --> 31:05.800

James Hurman: We have been through 100 years of introducing greater and greater creativity to advertising, introducing ever more sophisticated media planning, buying, targeting technologies. We invented the strategic planning discipline to help us make more persuasive ads. We invented the

31:05.800 --> 31:21.089

James Hurman: copy testing and creative testing discipline to help us figure out which ads were going to be better at driving sales. With all of those massive advances in resources and skills and technologies, we have not shifted these numbers at all.

31:21.090 --> 31:31.060

James Hurman: So, if advertising worked in the way that we thought it did, we would have, after all of that progress, seen these numbers change at least somewhat. They haven't changed at all.

31:31.060 --> 31:53.769

James Hurman: One of the other things that we would definitely see if advertising caused people to buy products, logically, we'd see the very best advertising causing most of the people that saw the ad to buy the products. There should be at least some cases of universally persuasive ads, but there are no cases of universally persuasive ads. Why? Because advertising actually does not work in the way that we thought it does.

31:53.770 --> 32:07.669

James Hurman: And this is kind of a really important and slightly shocking point that I'm going to make. Advertising doesn't cause sales, marketers. Advertising does not cause sales. It does, however, ensure brands win a gracious share of them.

32:07.840 --> 32:12.740

James Hurman: And… and so, the way that advertising does this

32:13.770 --> 32:33.480

James Hurman: is by doing these two equally important things. One is creating future demand, warming up the large group of people who aren't in the market yet, so that when they do come into market, they bias towards us. And secondly, by converting current demand, by getting as many of that small group of in-market people as possible to act on that bias that we've created.

32:33.480 --> 32:56.510

James Hurman: and choose us. That's why advertising has the conversion rates that it has, because not many people are in the market at any given point in time, so when you run a campaign, not 100%, or 50% or even 20% of that market is going to run out and buy the product. You're not actually in the market, but if we've done a great job with our advertising, all or most of the people in the market at that point in time will gravitate towards us.

32:56.510 --> 33:05.509

James Hurman: and choose us. So we've got these two things to manage. The amount of demand that we're creating in the market.

33:05.520 --> 33:10.679

James Hurman: Versus the amount of work that we're doing to, to convert that demand.

33:10.720 --> 33:27.889

James Hurman: If we don't continually create future demand, continually top up the familiarity of our brand, continue making that, you know, keeping that top of mind for people, then what happens is our level of demand stays flat.

33:27.890 --> 33:52.819

James Hurman: And as we grow, we can grow really quickly under that level of demand, but as soon as we sort of get up to that, our sales start to plateau, which is what we've always seen in young companies and startups going through this period of rapid early growth and then plateauing. We're now seeing it in most large organizations around the world. We're hitting the ceiling. And even though we might choose to keep spending more and more and more, that… that… those sales, those conversions still

33:52.820 --> 34:03.470

James Hurman: flat line, and that's what we're seeing at the moment. That's what the performance trap's about, this performance plateau, this thing that's happening where we're spending more and more money, but seeing less and less returns from that.

34:03.600 --> 34:28.470

James Hurman: If we continue to lift our demand ceiling by continuing to create future demand, continuing to build familiarity among that very big group who are going to come into the market later, then demand can still be converted at a sustainable rate, and as we spend more, it's still going to be converted sustainably, and we're still going to see the same sorts of returns. We've got to do these two things handily.

34:28.469 --> 34:35.299

James Hurman: hand in hand. Otherwise, we find what we're finding right now, which is that the results plateau out.

34:35.360 --> 34:49.979

James Hurman: So we've got these two jobs to do, convert current demand, create future demand, and so I want to talk now about what's most effective at converting current demand versus what's most effective at creating future demand. We've actually got to the point where we've optimized,

34:50.139 --> 35:06.229

James Hurman: performance marketing, the conversion of current demand, really excellently. We've done a great job of optimizing performance marketing, we really know how that works. We need to do just as good a job of optimizing brand marketing, the creation of future demand. So, to give you an example, so…

35:06.600 --> 35:30.270

James Hurman: if you were one of those people who put your hand up to say you're in the market for a new smartphone, I bet you'd stop and read information like this. So this is typical kind of functional information about two options from the smartphone category, prices, star ratings, facts and figures, and features and benefits, and fors and against, and all those sorts of things.

35:30.300 --> 35:46.540

James Hurman: If you're in the market for a smartphone, chances are you'll stop and read this. It's fundamentally interesting to you. You're in the process of thinking about these things, you want to make the right decision. You will very likely stop and read this information if you are in that market and haven't not already made your final choice.

35:47.060 --> 36:10.100

James Hurman: If you're not, though, if you're not in the market for a new smartphone right now, unless you're weirdly interested in smartphones, you're not going to stop and read this information. It's not… you have far too many other things going on in your life to stop and read a bunch of functional information about a product category that you're not intending to buy from in the near future. That's not to say that a

36:10.100 --> 36:22.190

James Hurman: Mobile phone brand could not engage you in some way, it would just need to happen on very different terms, not the facts and figures and specs and features and all that kind of stuff, which you will naturally filter out.

36:22.910 --> 36:47.569

James Hurman: Here's another example. This is an ad for a truck. It's a perfectly good ad for a truck. We've seen plenty of them in our lifetimes. Big picture of the product, a not very good headline, a bunch of waffle about the features and benefits of the truck. Call to action at the end. If you're in the market for a truck, if you're in the market for a commercial truck, chances are you'd stop and read this ad. But I'll get you to ask yourselves, are you in the

36:47.570 --> 36:58.420

James Hurman: market for a commercial truck. I'm guessing that everyone's thinking in their heads, no, I am not. It's very unlikely that you would stop and read that ad, but I bet you all watched this one.

37:00.210 --> 37:02.790

James Hurman: Oh, the sound's not playing, that's unusual.

37:03.730 --> 37:05.550

James Hurman: As I say, I'm playing your input.

37:06.780 --> 37:08.670

Pip Bingemann: Don't know why, at least.

37:09.380 --> 37:14.509

James Hurman: It's coming out of my… I can hear it coming out of my headphones. Hang on. Sorry, gang, I'm just gonna try and fix this.

37:15.590 --> 37:17.049

James Hurman: Can I fix this?

37:17.400 --> 37:18.390

James Hurman: Bear with.

37:30.780 --> 37:31.950

James Hurman: How about now?

37:32.580 --> 37:38.950

James Hurman: No, I stand here before you. What you see is a body crafted to perfection.

37:39.710 --> 37:44.019

James Hurman: A pair of legs engineered to defy the laws of physics.

37:44.360 --> 37:49.599

James Hurman: And a mindset to master the most epic of splits.

37:54.380 --> 37:57.790

James Hurman: Can't say we're low.

37:58.280 --> 38:15.469

James Hurman: And who can say if you love the rose as your hearts? Only time.

38:36.090 --> 38:54.620

James Hurman: It's a beautiful ad. We all watched it when it came out. It was very effective. 100 million, views in a matter of weeks after it launched. Sales increase for Volvo Trucks, the CEO of Volvo Trucks was very happy about all of it. And and so really effective piece of communication. What that ad did, though.

38:55.840 --> 39:10.450

James Hurman: is it created a shit ton of future demand. The reason that it did that was that, just like it reached all of us who are not in the market for a commercial truck and probably never will be, and have no reason to kind of really watch that ad, it reached all of us anyway.

39:10.450 --> 39:19.690

James Hurman: And it reached… who it also reached was all of the people who would come into the commercial truck category over the next few years, and gave them a bias towards Volvo trucks.

39:19.690 --> 39:21.479

James Hurman: And that's why we see

39:21.790 --> 39:25.490

James Hurman: If we look at the trajectory of Volvo Trucks after that ad.

39:25.490 --> 39:50.009

James Hurman: over the next few years, their market share just went up and up and up and up, as more people came into the market who had been impacted by that very creative piece of communication that everyone saw, and they came with a bias towards Volvo trucks, and a lot of the time, they ended up acting on that bias and buying a Volvo truck. And so, two very different styles of communication, one which is all about talking to people who are currently in the market.

39:50.010 --> 40:00.880

James Hurman: That ad on the left was probably in a trucking magazine, some kind of contextual media, which is likely to talk to people that are in the market for buying trucks. And the ad on the right was.

40:00.880 --> 40:15.369

James Hurman: a very, very different style of communication, indeed, that was engineered to reach the big group of buyers who would come into the category later, and impact on their future purchases. And so.

40:15.890 --> 40:34.510

James Hurman: The way that that ad worked, was by planting memories in the heads of future buyers, and creating future demand is all about planting positive memories of our brand in the heads of the huge group of future buyers who will buy from us, not tomorrow, but next week, or next month, or next quarter, or next year.

40:35.870 --> 40:55.210

James Hurman: And that requires 3 things. It requires creativity, it requires emotion, and it requires reaching a lot of people. I'm going to talk through these things. By creativity, what do I mean? I mean original ideas that are designed to engage people rather than just communicate at them. There are a few good examples that we're all familiar with.

40:56.210 --> 41:20.009

James Hurman: And we know from the historical data that creatively award-winning advertising, or advertising that has those qualities that I just described in droves, is much more efficient and effective at driving market share growth than ads that don't have those same characteristics. Less creative ads are much poorer at the same relative amount of media spend.

41:20.030 --> 41:24.480

James Hurman: Than the highly creative ads are driving market share growth over time.

41:24.490 --> 41:29.819

James Hurman: Why is this? This… the reason that this is, is that…

41:29.820 --> 41:52.949

James Hurman: If we think about the more rational ads that convert current demand, the small group of people who are in the market naturally pay attention to those ads. Just like if you're in the market for a smartphone, you pay attention to that information about smartphones that I showed you earlier. If you're in the market for a particular category, you're likely to pay attention to the ads for products in that market.

41:52.950 --> 42:17.070

James Hurman: Even if they're very informational and fact-based, because you're currently interested, that's currently relevant to you. If you are not in the market, you need something to earn your attention. Why did we all watch the Volvo Trucks ad, even though none of us are ever going to purchase a commercial truck, and it's legitimately a waste of 60 seconds of our time? It's because of the creativity. The creativity in that ad earned our attention, even though

42:17.070 --> 42:20.679

James Hurman: We're not in the category to, to purchase a commercial truck.

42:20.680 --> 42:37.299

James Hurman: And that's really the case for creativity when it comes to building future demand. Creativity earns the attention of that much larger group, and so it's got a shot of planting memories that that group will bring into the category as they come into the category later.

42:37.300 --> 42:54.410

James Hurman: Howard Gossage, back in the… back in the 1950s, said, nobody reads advertising, people read what interests them, and sometimes it's an ad. And it was as true then as it is today. Nobody pays attention to advertising, people pay attention to what interests them, and sometimes that's advertising. And when

42:54.410 --> 43:07.530

James Hurman: We're in a category, we will gladly pay attention to advertising for that category, and that's why we see that when it comes to driving very large immediate sales effects, converting current demand.

43:07.530 --> 43:31.850

James Hurman: Actually, it's the not-creative ads that are more effective at doing that. When people are in the category and they're interested in the category, they actually are quite happy to read functional information about that category. They don't need their attention to be earned by creativity. Just giving them the facts is the right thing to do. Same goes for emotion. If we want to convert people who are already in the category, we don't need to take an emotional approach. We're better just to put the rational information in front

43:31.850 --> 43:32.560

James Hurman: one of them.

43:32.560 --> 43:56.959

James Hurman: But when we want to talk to everyone else, and if we want to drive anything other than large immediate sales effects, we're better to go emotional. So what this shows is that, if we look at any meaningful longer-term brand metrics, such as base sales growth, market share growth, pricing power, loyalty, awareness, trust, differentiation, whatever we look at, it's the emotional ads that are much better at driving those sorts of outcomes.

43:56.960 --> 43:57.510

James Hurman: films.

43:58.130 --> 44:17.959

James Hurman: And why is this? It's because it goes back to something that Maya Angelou once said, which is that I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. We know that to be true because we're humans, but it's as true for brands as it is for people.

44:17.960 --> 44:28.680

James Hurman: And actually, what the, what the neuroscience has shown us, there's a professor, Robert Heath, in the UK, spent his life studying how the human brain stores information.

44:28.680 --> 44:53.339

James Hurman: We have two forms of memory. One is called implicit memory, it's where we store feelings. One's called explicit memory, it's where we store facts. They're two different parts of the brain, and our explicit memory, where we store facts, decays very quickly. We forget facts really quickly. Where we store feelings, our implicit memory decays very, very slowly. We remember feelings for a lot longer than we remember facts.

44:53.340 --> 44:55.219

James Hurman: So, so when we…

44:55.510 --> 45:18.409

James Hurman: come into, if we want to implant a memory in someone who's going to come into our category in 6 months' time, we want them to remember us when they do that. Giving them facts is no use. They will have forgotten those by the time they get into the category. If we make them feel something, they will carry that feeling into the category with them in 6 months' time. That's why emotion is so important.

45:18.410 --> 45:38.459

James Hurman: Emotion's also important for increasing profits. Emotional campaigns are much more likely to, to increase profits or be profitable as campaigns. And the reason for that is, that, when we feel good about something, we're more likely to be okay with paying more for it. There's a, there's a bias in

45:38.460 --> 45:58.820

James Hurman: the behavioral science called the affect heuristic. It means that we tend to judge things that we feel good about as being more valuable. That means we're happy to buy them when they're not on special, or when they cost a little bit more than the competitor costs, and that's where all the profit lies, right? Not discounting things and charging a little bit more.

45:59.340 --> 46:16.520

James Hurman: The third thing, besides creativity and emotion, that helps us build future demand is very broad targeting. So, what this chart shows is that when we target broadly, when it comes to market share growth, we see a much, much, much stronger outcome than when we target tightly, narrowly, sort of try and hyper…

46:16.520 --> 46:34.999

James Hurman: target and really personalize stuff to small groups of people. It's actually broad targeting, which is much better at creating future market share growth. And again, the reason for that is when we're creating future demand, we need to be talking to that massive group of people who aren't in the market just yet.

46:35.000 --> 46:55.960

James Hurman: It's no point talking to the very small group of people who are in the market right now. We should be talking to them with our performance marketing and with the marketing that we do to drive immediate sales, but when we want to create future demand, we need to be talking to that very big, very dispersed group of people who we need to reach through much more broadcast forms of advertising. So.

46:55.960 --> 47:05.099

James Hurman: Broadcast media or digital media, which is, which is set to, set on the basis of reach, as opposed to on the basis of targeting.

47:05.100 --> 47:24.010

James Hurman: And so that gives us a tidy little list of the right type of advertising to use for converting current demand, which is more rational, creativity, not as important. It's more based around a call to action. We want people to click here and buy now. And it's about tight targeting. If we can just target the people that are in the market.

47:24.010 --> 47:31.779

James Hurman: Through the use of retail media, or through the use of contextual targeting, or through these sorts of tools, that's the best thing that we can do.

47:31.780 --> 47:56.019

James Hurman: If we want to create future demand, it's the opposite. So we need creativity to earn the attention of people who aren't yet in the market. We need emotion to stick in their memories so that they recall us when they come into the market in 6 months' time. We're not going for an action. They're not in the market yet. They're not going to click here and buy now. We're going for memorability. What are they going to remember when they do come into the market naturally?

47:56.020 --> 48:10.309

James Hurman: over the next few months. And we need very broad targeting. We need to reach all the people who are not in the category. That is a much larger group, a much more dispersed group, and we need to target them in a way that uses broadcast media to reach them.

48:10.370 --> 48:13.950

James Hurman: And that's what we kind of classically think of as performance and brand.

48:14.640 --> 48:15.490

James Hurman: Now.

48:15.590 --> 48:38.249

James Hurman: it's no news to any of us that have been working in, you know, the brand marketing field for many years that brand marketing makes companies larger and more valuable. If we look at the work that Kantar's Brand Z initiative do, they study the most… the strongest and most powerful brands in their portfolio of companies that they track, compare those companies against the S&P 500, and

48:38.250 --> 48:59.890

James Hurman: for forever and ever and ever, not only in this current age of the Mag7 and all the rest of it distorting the, the public markets, right back to, way before those companies were so impactful, we always saw the brands with, that… or the companies, I should say, that had stronger brands, more familiar, more well-liked by more people.

48:59.890 --> 49:07.620

James Hurman: Delivering better share market performance than those companies that just had great fundamentals, but didn't have a great brand on top of that.

49:07.650 --> 49:21.980

James Hurman: But we've not been very good at telling that story. I talked to Dara Tressida, who was then the CEO of CMO of Peloton a few years ago. She said to me, you know, James, marketing has not done a very good job of marketing marketing.

49:22.040 --> 49:45.779

James Hurman: And it's a really pithy statement, but she's absolutely right. We've often done a great job of marketing the products and the brands that we serve. We've not done nearly as good a job of marketing the discipline that we are a part of, letting non-marketing stakeholders know how marketing works, and how it contributes value, and why we should invest in it. We've been not so good at doing that. We need to get a lot better at that.

49:45.780 --> 49:52.460

James Hurman: Because too often, we've been asked the question, how does brand marketing add commercial value? How does this kind of good, fun.

49:52.460 --> 50:10.759

James Hurman: fuzzy stuff actually, you know, contribute to the top or bottom line of this company? And often, our explanation for that has been, you know, one which is not particularly good in terms of an explanation. We tend to stare into the distance like rabbits in the headlights.

50:10.760 --> 50:17.800

James Hurman: So, so a lot of my, kind of, past few years has been about answering that question and squaring that circle, right? And…

50:17.800 --> 50:41.239

James Hurman: If you want to… if you get asked what the point of brand marketing is, how it adds commercial value, this is the answer. Brand marketing is the creation of future demand. It makes people who aren't in the market yet familiar with us and emotionally positive toward us, so when they enter the market, they gravitate toward us, and they pay more for us. That is what brand marketing does. That's why it's important.

50:41.240 --> 51:04.599

James Hurman: And when we don't do it, we end up with poorer outcomes than when we do do it in a good balance, alongside our performance marketing. I'm going to finish with a story. Love telling the story. This is from a guy called Jeremy Bullmore, who is one of the most famous and most productive people in the advertising industry in the UK over the past many decades. He said.

51:04.600 --> 51:27.310

James Hurman: In a WPP annual report, he told this story. Many years ago, the late Len Heath, then in his mid-40s, sold his interest in an advertising agency and took me out to lunch. Afterwards, he offered to drive me back to my office. I protested. My office was no more than 10 minutes' walk away. But Len insisted, and when we got to his car, I understood why. It was a shining, stunning, elegant, arrogant, latest model Aston Martin.

51:27.310 --> 51:31.040

James Hurman: It was the first time I'd been inside an Aston Martin, and it didn't disappoint.

51:31.040 --> 51:43.410

James Hurman: You may be interested to know why I bought this car, said Len. I bought it because I saw an advertisement for it. Well, fancy that, I said. But that's not the interesting bit, said Len. What's interesting is that I saw that advertisement when I was 14.

51:43.520 --> 52:06.510

James Hurman: And I love telling that story because it really brings to light the reality that a lot of the advertising, the marketing that we do pays off over a longer term. Now, most of us are fortunate not to work in luxury automotive, where that longer term means decades and decades. Most of us are working in categories where the future demand that we're creating with the brand marketing that we do right now pays off, and

52:06.510 --> 52:25.430

James Hurman: 3, 6, 9, 12 months' time. But it's true that we need to be doing that sort of marketing. That's how we drive sustainable growth. That's how we keep the ROI of our overall marketing portfolio as strong as it can be, is by making sure that we do both of these things well.

52:26.570 --> 52:34.399

James Hurman: And I will end there. Thank you very much for allowing me to talk about the new book, and I'd love to take some questions if there are some.

52:35.740 --> 52:36.920

Pip Bingemann: Definitely.

52:37.330 --> 52:43.049

Pip Bingemann: Before we jump into questions, there's a couple in there that I'm gonna read out. I just want to say a massive thank you.

52:43.330 --> 52:50.009

Pip Bingemann: A lot of the stuff that you've put in here, like, People know intuitively.

52:50.370 --> 52:51.050

James Hurman: Hmm.

52:51.600 --> 52:55.450

Pip Bingemann: But really struggle to communicate it eloquently.

52:55.780 --> 53:01.320

Pip Bingemann: And I think what you do so beautifully is just make it so damn fucking obvious.

53:01.760 --> 53:17.879

Pip Bingemann: that people need to see this, and I… and I… I thank you for putting the work in and making it easier for everyone else in the industry to take some of the work that you've done, which you've done for a very, very long time, not just with this book, but other things that you've done.

53:18.210 --> 53:25.119

Pip Bingemann: To not, like, convince or pull the wool over of anyone's eyes, but to just to do better work.

53:25.350 --> 53:29.239

Pip Bingemann: And I think this, like, gives people the ability to do it. So, a big, big thank you.

53:29.240 --> 53:47.530

James Hurman: Thank you for saying that, and I mean, that's a big… I mean, I think because we need to get better at marketing, marketing, because we need to get better at communicating these things, it's incumbent on us to make them really simple, so… so thank you for saying that, and yes, that's a very intentional, thing that I do. How do we make this so simple that it's easy to pass on to others, right?

53:47.870 --> 54:10.070

Pip Bingemann: And it's an incredibly hard thing to do as well. It's a massive gift, so it's super impressive. Alright, I'm going to interrupt for 10 seconds. I'm going to show one thing in our product, because I want to get one thing across to people, which is important for this stuff, and then I want to get to questions. I'm not going to show a deck, I'm going to show a new thing we've launched called DiscoTab, because it helps you identify some of that good work, and so I am going to share this screen just mega, mega quick.

54:10.070 --> 54:14.779

Pip Bingemann: So… This is the newest thing we've launched, it's called Discovery Tab.

54:14.950 --> 54:25.410

Pip Bingemann: You can click that, and you can search 10,000 plus of the world's best campaigns across history, but you can filter that for campaigns that drive nostalgia.

54:25.690 --> 54:39.720

Pip Bingemann: And the strategic intent is to, say, build fame. And so this is, this is such a incredibly powerful resource, if you then need to go find examples of that. But more than that, you can drag these into chat, and you can say, tell me about this. Yeah.

54:41.020 --> 54:51.030

Pip Bingemann: Or you can put it onto your canvas, and you can brief your creative teams in of, like, this is how that problem's been solved before, or you could smash two campaigns together, and you can go do that. And so…

54:51.030 --> 55:01.419

Pip Bingemann: There are tools to help you get better at showing that work once you've actually gone through the rest of it, but this is something that I've been so excited about to get into the world, and it's super cool. So I'm gonna stop sharing that.

55:01.420 --> 55:17.889

Pip Bingemann: And get into some questions, because that is, like, fucking cool, go play with it. So, there's a couple of questions in the chat that I want to get straight to. I've got my own questions, but I want to give the questions to a few other people first. So, Stephanie Resort, and I probably pronounce your name wrong every time I read it in my mind, Stephanie.

55:17.890 --> 55:22.009

Pip Bingemann: Had a great question, was, given the power of familiarity infrastructure.

55:22.610 --> 55:36.519

Pip Bingemann: Should brands be shifting from intense bursts models for brand activity to more of a continuity model? Budgets permit, of course. So, the old flight in, are we burst, are we always on? What are your thoughts around flight in, in regards to everything you've just taken us through?

55:36.680 --> 55:41.120

James Hurman: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, when it comes to brand marketing, we should, you know, take the…

55:41.230 --> 55:56.009

James Hurman: let me ladder up. When it comes to budget allocation, like, let's say we've got a total amount of money for our advertising over a year. We should divide that in half, and take half of it as brand marketing. Then we should take that half of it, divide it in 12, and spend that much every month.

55:56.010 --> 56:11.010

James Hurman: And… and that's a really simple way of thinking about it, and of budgeting. So yeah, the whole thing of the idea that would take the whole budget and spend it on a two-month campaign, and that's our brand job done for the year, I mean, absolutely fallacious. There's no…

56:11.010 --> 56:26.010

James Hurman: In any market at any given time, there is all of this future demand out there, and we need to be continually talking to that group, topping that familiarity up. It's an always-on job, it's not a kind of one-and-done or once-a-year-and-done job.

56:26.010 --> 56:37.849

James Hurman: And so, yes, absolutely, we should be doing things which are very, very consistent. And that doesn't mean within that kind of 1 12th we spend every month.

56:37.850 --> 56:52.859

James Hurman: We just do exactly the same things over and over again. We can do all sorts of different things, but they should be emotional, creative things that talk back to the position of the brand, and which engage people in a way that makes them remember us when they come into market later.

56:53.510 --> 57:07.310

Pip Bingemann: That is some of the best advice I've heard from media planning ever, and I wish they heard that a very long time ago. And so anyone who's watching this on the recording, just listen to that one comment if you're a media strategist or planner. It will make your life easier. Alright, next one.

57:07.310 --> 57:15.699

Pip Bingemann: What are the most common pitfalls you see with businesses when trying to plan for this future demand? So what are the big, biggest traps they fall into?

57:15.700 --> 57:21.670

Pip Bingemann: And what best practices do they need to unlearn at the same time? So what are the traps, and what do they need to unlearn?

57:22.180 --> 57:26.429

James Hurman: I think the traps are, you know, number one trap is, is…

57:26.430 --> 57:51.349

James Hurman: believing that advertising works by causing sales. That means that we end up… the whole process gets organized to try and find the most persuasive message, which, you know, we tend to sort of default to kind of rational stuff and try and persuade people. Then we try and cram everything into one ad, how are we going to build brand and drive sales? Once we understand what I've just talked about, the reality of markets and how

57:51.350 --> 58:16.210

James Hurman: make decisions, that enables us to, you know, think about these two steps that advertising takes and organize around those in a much more productive way. So, you know, when we're… when we're converting current demand, we don't need to… we don't need the big creative idea, we don't need the big emotional thing. We can be… we can do the much simpler job of just putting the information out there, and we can automate most of that using AI now. When we're, thinking about how to create future demand.

58:16.210 --> 58:39.160

James Hurman: we need the big guns, we need the great creative ideas, we need the emotional content, we need the stuff that springboards is going to help you, help you find your way towards. We need that in droves. And so we… so that helps us kind of get past that silly argument that we all have, which is, like, tussling over, you know, whether the ads, you know, the message outtake is clear enough, and then are we

58:39.160 --> 59:03.269

James Hurman: emotionally storytelling enough, and, you know, trying to find a balance between those things and one execution is impossible, and we all end… we always end up with a bunch of shit. If we separate out those two tasks, things become far, far easier, and we've always got the ability in the budget to make two executions under the same campaign, one that's tightly targeted, more rational, more kind of informational, and another that is broadly targeted, more

59:03.270 --> 59:05.519

James Hurman: More, emotional, more creative.

59:06.140 --> 59:18.229

Pip Bingemann: How are you for time? I want to be respectful of that. I've got more questions, you good? Okay, we'll do just 2 or 3 more questions, and then we'll wrap it, because I want to be respectful. Good follow-up question to this is,

59:18.780 --> 59:27.889

Pip Bingemann: Given the comment on, or Dyson's comment on brand size, what's your advice for a small B2B client that doesn't have the recognition to drive future

59:28.000 --> 59:32.389

Pip Bingemann: Demand. But also doesn't have the big budget for big branding campaigns.

59:32.650 --> 59:33.450

James Hurman: Yeah.

59:33.620 --> 59:41.470

Pip Bingemann: B2B, don't have budgets, all the recognition. Are you fucked, or what are you doing?

59:41.470 --> 59:48.989

James Hurman: And brand building and the creation of future demand is… is a, it's a sliding scale, depending on where you are in the category. So if you're… if you've got…

59:48.990 --> 01:00:13.039

James Hurman: 1% market share, and you want to get to 2% market share, you need a lot less money than if you've got, you know, 50% market share and you want to get to 80% market share. They're really good things, and so… so when you… when you're thinking, you know, the idea of brand building isn't about doing big, expensive things and reaching the entire market. The idea is doing creative, emotional things and reaching an audience that's much bigger than your current

01:00:13.040 --> 01:00:14.269

James Hurman: current customer group.

01:00:14.270 --> 01:00:23.149

James Hurman: Right? So if your current customer group is 100 people, and you're reaching 1,000 people, you're doing the right thing. Reaching that 1,000 people does not cost a million dollars.

01:00:23.150 --> 01:00:47.390

James Hurman: And being creative and emotional is not about doing massive television campaigns, it's about doing creative, emotional stuff at what any ever scale you can afford to do. So, every single big brand was a tiny little brand once, and they had tiny little budgets, and all they did was incrementally kind of move up and up and up and up, and each year make sure they were spending enough money to reach, you know, more people than they were currently at as customers.

01:00:47.440 --> 01:01:05.880

James Hurman: And building from there. And if you're lucky enough to be able to, you know, secure a massive budget to drive some really fast growth up that market share curve, then good on you. But if you're not, you know, it's just kind of… it's still the same discipline that you use in the larger organization. The principles apply just in a scaled-down way.

01:01:06.950 --> 01:01:13.700

Pip Bingemann: I'm gonna ask one last question, and then I've got a request for you as well, before we close it out. My last question is, is like.

01:01:14.160 --> 01:01:19.360

Pip Bingemann: And this is from me, is that you've shown us the evidence for 20, 30 years that we've known this.

01:01:19.990 --> 01:01:22.230

Pip Bingemann: We've known it for a very long time.

01:01:22.530 --> 01:01:37.399

Pip Bingemann: Why are we still, or why is the industry or marketers still making the wrong mistake? Why are we still putting more money into performance? Why is efficiency still going down? What do we need to do differently to wake people the fuck up?

01:01:37.960 --> 01:01:39.419

James Hurman: Yeah, I think,

01:01:39.470 --> 01:01:52.090

James Hurman: A couple of things. So, one, I think we have had the information, it's just not been… I think we've still tried to apply that information to a mental model that was the wrong mental model for how advertising works.

01:01:52.090 --> 01:01:59.729

James Hurman: I think what I'm trying to do with Future Demand is introduce a new mental model that helps us make sense of all of that research in a way that makes it very applicable.

01:01:59.730 --> 01:02:16.590

James Hurman: And so hopefully that lands. And the second thing is non-marketing stakeholders, right? They are the handbrake on everything. They still operate under an incorrect mental model of how advertising and marketing works. They are uninformed of all of the marketing science and effectiveness research stuff.

01:02:16.590 --> 01:02:34.810

James Hurman: And so, and so that's our… that's our real big challenge at the moment. How do we educate the non-marketing stakeholder community, whether that's CEOs, CFOs, boards, or anyone else around us in the organization. I'm doing a ton of work on that at the moment, but every marketer in every organization should be

01:02:34.810 --> 01:02:46.429

James Hurman: Trying to take this information, package it up, give it to their non-marketing stakeholders to read, so they understand where they're coming from, because we've not done a good enough job of that, and if we want to really make things

01:02:46.430 --> 01:02:50.070

James Hurman: you know, consistently better. We need those folks on our side.

01:02:50.370 --> 01:03:06.629

Pip Bingemann: Yeah, I think the VCs need to hear this more than anyone else, but that's a debate for another topic tonight. Alright, this is my last request. Those slides you had on each of the categories in Market Future Demand are some of the most powerful slides I've seen to sell this point.

01:03:06.840 --> 01:03:13.010

Pip Bingemann: I would love it if there was a website where people could drop down market, what do I look at? Because that is the evidence that

01:03:13.040 --> 01:03:27.219

Pip Bingemann: people need. It is just such a blatant way to go, oh, fuck, why are we spending all this money in performance when 90% of the market is not in the market? And so, that is the request I have of you, is to share those things as widely as possible, because I just think they're so powerful.

01:03:27.330 --> 01:03:29.110

Pip Bingemann: Yeah, yeah.

01:03:29.110 --> 01:03:47.910

James Hurman: It's a really good, it's a really good nudge, actually, because I think I've done that using survey data, but there's probably a way with AI and synthetic data that we could actually get pretty close to estimating what those demand shapes look like in any category. So, let me take that away to Claude and do some vibe coding and see…

01:03:47.910 --> 01:03:54.379

Pip Bingemann: Yeah. Alright, actually, last question, because you've mentioned AI, I wasn't going to mention it. Is this going to get better or worse with AI?

01:03:54.520 --> 01:03:59.549

James Hurman: Yeah, so, let me show you… I, I… do you know what I did? I,

01:04:00.520 --> 01:04:04.960

James Hurman: I'm just gonna do, this again. Let's say…

01:04:10.330 --> 01:04:12.410

James Hurman: The full screen? Okay.

01:04:12.410 --> 01:04:35.219

James Hurman: Look at this. So, with AI, so we're… at the moment, we're having lots of, lots of conversations about agenda commerce, about, GEO or AEO, whatever we want to call it, optimizing for, a potential future where agents do all of our shopping for us, or at least, you know, people are buying stuff that they're seeing in LLM answers.

01:04:35.220 --> 01:04:59.009

James Hurman: So, these are just some points that, you know, from the current state of the research, that I can assure you of. So, firstly, LLMs reward fame. So, the recent studies show that two-thirds of LLM visibility can be accounted for by brand equity, right? By the stuff that your company has done in the past to build its brand. Current marketing activity is about a quarter.

01:04:59.010 --> 01:05:22.510

James Hurman: citation volume, only about 10%. So, citation volume, when we're looking at GEO and AEO, you know, tools that are all out there to get you as many sort of citations as possible, that's only accounting for about 10% of what LLMs care about. So, LLMs care about the same things that humans do. They are trying to triangulate what will be a safe choice for the human they're serving.

01:05:22.510 --> 01:05:43.949

James Hurman: And those, safety… that safety decision is a probabilistic one based on, all sorts of signals like, trust and consistency and category entry points and, and all of these sorts of things that we use in the real normal world. LLMs are making decisions in a very similar way to how humans make decisions when they're thinking about brands.

01:05:43.950 --> 01:05:57.659

James Hurman: Secondly, the idea that agents will go and buy everything that we, that we need in the future is, is not right. So the agents will help us shortlist things, but the human will still pick. And…

01:05:57.720 --> 01:06:22.410

James Hurman: even if agents do end up taking over and making purchases from us, for us, on our behalf, I should say, even the most aggressive, forecasts, Agentic commerce will make up 10-14% of total consumer spend. So the other 86% to 90% will be done the non-agentic, normal old way. So we should not kind of suddenly throw it all out and pivot towards Agentic commerce

01:06:22.560 --> 01:06:36.820

James Hurman: Because we'll do very well with the 10% to 14%, and we will lose the rest of the business, which is still being built the old way. So, yes, so we're… I'm publishing more about this, in the near future through Tracksuit, but…

01:06:37.020 --> 01:06:46.569

James Hurman: you know, it's very clear that a brand is going to become no less important in an AI LLM agenda commerce future than it is right now, so we need.

01:06:46.570 --> 01:06:47.210

Pip Bingemann: Me too.

01:06:48.270 --> 01:07:03.209

Pip Bingemann: I've got a thought on GEO, and how it's a little bit of a scam, but that's a conversation for another day. So maybe I'll show you a few things in future, but I just want to say thank you again, James, and thanks for everyone who's attending, and for the people that watch later.

01:07:03.210 --> 01:07:11.730

Pip Bingemann: this, like I said in the startup, this, I think, is some of the most important stuff people need to know in the market, and again, thank you for taking

01:07:11.840 --> 01:07:12.770

Pip Bingemann: something.

01:07:12.890 --> 01:07:22.160

Pip Bingemann: that is complicated to communicate and simplifying it, which I just think is so important for… for what we all try and do. So, thanks, James, for everything, mate. It's massively appreciated.

01:07:22.160 --> 01:07:34.549

James Hurman: Yeah, so welcome. Thank you for having me on. I'm gonna go and get in the shower now and fix this hair, which is just not behaving. Lovely to see you, Pip, and thanks, everyone, for coming along.

01:07:34.770 --> 01:07:37.130

Pip Bingemann: Sounds good. Thanks. Have a good one, guys.

01:07:37.240 --> 01:07:38.010

Pip Bingemann: Bye.

‍