<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Nigel Hollis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mb-blog.com/wp-feed.php" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mb-blog.com</link>
	<description>A blog and forum by Nigel Hollis</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Today&#8217;s consumer: mindful or conflicted?</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/09/02/todaysconsumermindfulorconflicted/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/09/02/todaysconsumermindfulorconflicted/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[consumer behavior]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[consumption]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2219</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My colleague Benoit Tranzer has just written a Point of View about the need for brands to appeal to the new “mindful” consumer. Mindful consumption, he suggests, is demonstrated by consumers buying fewer products and fewer brands, and being more considered in their choices. Benoit believes this trend heralds a new era—one in which brands [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/09/02/todaysconsumermindfulorconflicted/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is 500 million a big number?</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/23/is-500-million-a-big-number/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/23/is-500-million-a-big-number/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:05:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is 500 million a big number? That seems like a dumb question, right? Of course it’s a big number. But then the U.S. deficit is $1.471 trillion. So that’s a HUGE number—particularly when you’re a U.S. taxpayer. What about the nearly 2 billion with access to the Internet? Sort of middling huge? In the light [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/23/is-500-million-a-big-number/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does your brand need life support?</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/16/does-your-brand-need-life-support/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/16/does-your-brand-need-life-support/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Voltage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I suggested in my previous post, branding is a double-edged sword. Once you have created a strong brand, you must then continue to invest in it or else suffer withdrawal symptoms: stagnant sales performance, weakened margins, and increased vulnerability to competitive action. But, I wondered, what equity metrics might signal that a brand is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/16/does-your-brand-need-life-support/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The tyranny of brand success</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/08/the-tyranny-of-brand-success/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/08/the-tyranny-of-brand-success/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 01:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[brand mission]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[branding]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[company mission]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Dede Fitch]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Jim Stengel]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Joy Abdullah]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[mission]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[mission statement]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[The Brand Bubble]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2144</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a lot of evidence that strong brands make more money and are worth more than weak ones. Analysis of Millward Brown’s own Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands ranking demonstrates that the strongest brands outperform the Standard &#38; Poors equity index. But once you have created a strong brand are you then hostage [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/08/the-tyranny-of-brand-success/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The real reasons behind the viral success of Old Spice</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/01/the-real-reasons-behind-the-viral-success-of-old-spice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/01/the-real-reasons-behind-the-viral-success-of-old-spice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 03:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Isaiah Mustafa]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Old Spice]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Denny]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[viral]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[viral marketing]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[viral video]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Finally someone has got it right. Old Spice’s “The Man Your Man Could Smell Like” has become an iconic success for the use of viral marketing because it has generated mass reach. Instead of engaging just a few people, it has engaged tens of millions.
There are many articles documenting the success of Old Spice’s ”The [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/08/01/the-real-reasons-behind-the-viral-success-of-old-spice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Neuroscience findings confirm our understanding of how advertising works</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/28/neuroscience-findings-confirm-our-understanding-of-how-advertising-works/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/28/neuroscience-findings-confirm-our-understanding-of-how-advertising-works/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 01:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[advertising research]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[attentional blink]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[David Brennan]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Gordon Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Graham Page]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[information chunking]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Jane Raymond]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[market research]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[neuroscience]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[pretesting]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Thinkbox]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[tracking]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[traditional researach]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When different researchers using different techniques arrive at the same conclusion, the authority of that conclusion is enhanced. So I am pleased to see that that some new neuroscience research has reached the same conclusions that Millward Brown arrived at decades ago through traditional consumer research.
The new research, funded by the U.K.’s Thinkbox and reported [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/28/neuroscience-findings-confirm-our-understanding-of-how-advertising-works/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why did Google decide to run a TV ad?</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/25/why-did-google-decide-to-run-a-tv-ad/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/25/why-did-google-decide-to-run-a-tv-ad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:28:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Insights Conference]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Karen Tsay]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[search engines]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Super Bowl]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[TV advertising]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2088</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Because I didn&#8217;t watch the Super Bowl, I missed seeing the first airing of Google’s new  TV ad. Instead I saw it for the first time as part of a presentation by Karen Tsay at the Consumer Insights Conference hosted by the Yale School of Management a month ago. Karen said she had no idea [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/25/why-did-google-decide-to-run-a-tv-ad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New “brand equity” metric promotes knee-jerk marketing</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/19/new-brand-equity-metric-promotes-knee-jerk-marketing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/19/new-brand-equity-metric-promotes-knee-jerk-marketing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:16:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[brand equity]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[online buzz]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Razorfish]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[SIM]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Social Influence Marketing]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Toyota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently Google Alerts brought me a link to Headlight, a blog on digital and automotive trends from Razorfish. There I found a post promoting a new metric for measuring brand equity, titled, “The new brand bealth metric: Your SIM Score.” The “Brand Bealth” metric is based on social media influence.  I see some real issues [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/19/new-brand-equity-metric-promotes-knee-jerk-marketing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>GM owns Chevrolet, but Americans own a Chevy</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/12/gm-owns-chevrolet-but-americans-own-a-chevy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/12/gm-owns-chevrolet-but-americans-own-a-chevy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:37:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Brands]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[brand names]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[branding]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Chevrolet]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Chevy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[David Welch]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[GM]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Paul Feldwick]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few weeks ago, there was a furor in the media and on blogs when it was learned that GM had asked employees to refer to &#8220;Chevrolet&#8221; rather use than the familiar and diminutive name “Chevy.” In a recent Autobeat post, David Welch refers to GM’s desire as “corporate silliness.” He goes on to state, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/12/gm-owns-chevrolet-but-americans-own-a-chevy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TV and Social Media have different but complementary strengths</title>
		<link>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/05/tv-and-social-media-have-different-but-complementary-strengths/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/05/tv-and-social-media-have-different-but-complementary-strengths/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2010 08:45:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Hollis</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[John Deighton]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Millward Brown]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nigel Hollis]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[social networks]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[TV]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mb-blog.com/?p=2080</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you have been reading the industry news in the United States, you will see that TV is back in favor. Spend is up, upfront CPMs are higher and - shock, horror - research finds that TV still drives word of mouth. Meanwhile there have been several articles that suggest that marketers are still scratching [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2010/07/05/tv-and-social-media-have-different-but-complementary-strengths/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
