Did Hublot Miss Their Chance To Make A Real Difference – You Tell Us?
Unless you were on another planet recently (and even then) you couldn’t possibly have missed the latest online turmoil surrounding the release of the latest Hublot ad campaign. The buzz around this controversial marketing move has been making all the social network rounds starting with Twitter and Facebook.
The ad was actually announced on Facebook before skyrocketing to fame in every other imaginable media conduit including the Financial Times and International Herald Tribune sometime this week.
So far public reaction has been mixed. Some people hail this as another genius move from horology marketing legend Jean-Claude Biver. Others decry the concept as nothing more than a distasteful “shock and awe” ploy.
I won’t add my own opinion to the mix because I don’t believe it to be any more valuable (or interesting for that matter) than any of the numerous others currently being expressed everywhere. It’s always easy to opine – positive or negative – after the fact. But it’s a lot harder to execute and achieve success in this industry. And in the success department, few people can hold a candle to Jean-Claude Biver. I know nothing about marketing or selling watches. So the best I can do is shut up and learn.
The one thing I do know about, and clearly care to comment about, are the “social media” aspects – or lack thereof – of this blockbuster campaign. Because to me, this was a classic guerrilla marketing tactic, but not a social media move. It’s classic Hublot at its best (as many people point out), and that’s where I feel a little disappointed. Because this campaign could have packed some significant social juice. It could have made a real difference for people, not just the bottom line.
How so?
Remember the story of the girl named Ivanna (as recounted in Here Comes Everybody) who left her cell phone in a NYC cab? The phone was then stolen by a kid who refused to return it. Ivanna’s friend Evan then used the power of social media to publicize and subsequently hunt down, locate and force the cops to arrest the teenager in question. The story made front page in the New York Times (see the links at the bottom of this document).
This and other examples of social media bettering a human condition or solving real human problems are easily found on the web. Nothing new there.
Social media is about putting customers and people at the center of the equation. And effecting real change socially and commercially. The two are inevitably linked these days! Imagine having come out and said: we will donate $50,000 for any information leading to the capture and successful prosecution of the lowlifes responsible for this despicable act.
Furthermore, we’re going to put up a website and a Facebook page entirely dedicated to this effort. Not only that, but we will donate money to violent crime victim associations every time we get another 100 fans on our Facebook page until Christmas. Because together, we can and will make a difference.
How long do you think it would be before the scumbags who beat an 80 year old man to a pulp for a mere watch would be found and locked up for good – unable to hurt additional victims? How much goodwill would this generate for a brand who could pull this off? Don’t believe me? Read this: “Social good initiatives may not always be a boon for sales, but they are a great way to lock in brand loyalty with a demographic that cares about connecting with causes online.” from this article here.
The Final Word
I’m no flower child. But as a social media strategist, if I see an opportunity to use my weapon for social welfare and commercial purpose by getting my community involved, you better believe I’m on it 
– After all, these opportunities don’t come around everyday. But that’s just me.
How about you? What would you have done?
Category: Recommended Reading
it very sad how some people react in times of greed and need.. some do hideous crimes just to get what they want. or even take lives just to suffice one’s satisfactions.. SOCIAL CHANGE it is.. that what people need.
Where To Buy Luxury Watches
I meanwhile cant see that picture of Bernie Eckelstone anymore; it’s all over the Internet and social media places! Very well done Hublot; in terms of marketing. Although I personally can’t see why people should want a Hublot watch after seeing the battered face of an ugly old man.
If social media can be, or is used to fight criminals – as Jérôme mentions above – it’s brilliant of course. However the purpose of the Eckelstone Hublot ad is clearly to attract attention to the watch and the brand Hublot, and not to the fact that we have to fight against criminality. I don’t think combining results of violence with attracting attention to a brand or product is a sign of good taste and behavior.
That the small letters read that Hublot is against violence, doesn’t make any difference – aren’t we all against violence? So that’s pretty obvious and it should not be necessary to mention it in the ad.
I cannot agree more with Jerome’s criticism of Hublot’s questionable approach to this campaign.
Sure, everyone’s talking about it – and by consequence Hublot – but the fact that the meaning of this page/AD/campaign can be misconstrued and the fact that there were, as Jerome points out, other more opportune ways of exploiting the unfortunate attack for more socially beneficial causes, which would then reflect on the brand, means that they probably didn’t think this through enough (or Jerome was no longer there to point the other option out…).
I think the take away from this is simple: brand identity is something you don’t play with lightly. Do so and you inevitably damage the public’s perception of your brand in some way which is why so few businesses do it and why Brand Guidelines are written by people like me.
Many trust in Mr Biver’s precognitive judgment, and while I’m sure he’s capable of shaking the mold to his company’s advantage, on this occasion, they simply missed a great opportunity to associate the brand with a valid cause and got themselves caught up in a did they/didn’t they? mêlée.
Hi @Michael – I just want to point out, I was not trying to criticize their approach at all. I think they did what they do best: get noticed in a big way. From a marketing standpoint, I suppose that’s golden but as I point out, I’m not qualified to comment on marketing issues anyway, much less “question” their strategy. At the end of day, let the market speak is all I can say. The market – and the customer – is always right.
I just regret the missed opportunity to really put these thugs who attacked Bernie behind bars. Whether this would have been good or bad for the brand, I know not. But I DO know it would have been a lot better for their future victims
Best and thanks for chiming in!
J.
@Jerome Point taken and I *should* have written “critique” as in “analysis”. My bad. 10 lashes.
Jerome, you have taken your brilliant social media scalpel to the patient. Hublot had an opportunity to make a meaningful statement and support their position of philanthropy and helping people. Instead they exploited the situation, as you point out, as a marketing move. While the move certainly brings attention to the brand and perhaps gets people interested in the watches purely on a curious level, that extra punch of helping the victim actually probably would’ve gone a long way toward bringing in more sales. The thought on the customer’s part would be, I’m supporting a brand that cares about its customers, mitigating or justifying the purchase. If you can bring about a warm fuzzy feeling in your customer while getting them to spend money, you’ve succeeded.
Thanks @Meehna – I don’t know I would use the word brilliant in the same sentence with Jerome though
Hublot did what they do best – come out with a (big) bang – the buzz they got from it was simply awesome. For some reason I just can’t help but think about the next people these guys will beat senseless – long after Bernie’s black & blue is all gone…