advertising

predictions

Three (Industry-Relevant) Marketing Trends for 2017

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Jan 15, 2017, in Thoughts , tagged with , , ,

Predictions are an interest of mine and of course this time of year there are predictions everywhere about everything. Over the past few weeks I’ve digested more articles about marketing trends than I care to admit. The writing tends to be aggressive and the ideas are all over the place, ranging from better content to Snapchat to optimizing Web sites for Echo and Home voice-triggered searches.

Of course articles tailored to asset management are hard to come by. So after digesting all of these predictions, I thought to highlight the most common ones with potential (or ongoing) relevance to our industry. I ended up with three, so let’s count them down:

3. Mobile

Mobile remains important for well-known reasons, namely the continued growth of mobile Web traffic and search providers’ prioritization of mobile-friendly sites and results.

So what’s relevant for asset managers? Firms know the value of a responsive Web site. However, client-facing mobile apps have largely been a difficult obstacle. You can certainly count me as a skeptic as far as the opportunity to engage advisors and institutions via apps, especially when those apps typically do little but repackage information already available on the site.

But successful apps (outside the industry) deliver a better user experience and attract stickier usage than good Web sites. In addition, Google now offers app indexing. While I don’t think we’ll see any significant progress with client-facing apps in the near future, I do expect that they’ll remain a periodic topic of conversation with firms hoping to figure out a way to deploy them effectively.

2. Native Advertising

Ad blocking, increased competition on social media platforms and other factors are making it more challenging for traditional ads to get through and attract attention. Already a major factor with diverse execution methods, some project native advertising will make up nearly three-quarters of US ad revenue within five years.

So what’s relevant for asset managers? Developing compelling content and messaging has been an industry focal point for a while now. Marketing teams now find themselves at a point where creativity in promotion and placement is at least as important as creating the content / message itself.

Adoption of native advertising has been gradual within asset management. Given the intensity of the competition today, it seems that now is the time for it to accelerate.

1. Video

Ah, a topic that we’ve been talking about since the day Naissance began. The continued importance of video was a mainstay of almost every predictions piece I read. More content, more ads, more live streaming… all supported by an army of statistics on why video is so effective.

So what’s interesting for asset managers? I am actually a little stumped. On the one hand, video came up in no fewer than 5 client meetings last month. It’s on a lot of firms’ radars.

On the other hand I’ve already gone on record with why I think video isn’t done all that well across the industry. And if you exclude entertainment there’s still solid evidence that people prefer reading to watching.

Video ads certainly are an opportunity. But unless we see firms venture down the live streaming path or get creative in terms of presentation and format, this is one trend where I expect less interesting progress.

which way?

Two Ads, Portfolio Construction, and a Strategic Dilemma for Asset Managers

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Jul 11, 2016, in Thoughts , tagged with , , , ,

A few years ago we worked with a large asset management firm to conduct a strategic review of the robo-advisor market. At the time our client simply wanted to learn more about the space and consider the implications, both good and bad, of these potentially-ascendant companies.

One topic we addressed during the work was portfolio construction. Specifically, the fact that for the most part asset managers held a mostly undefined role in it for advisors and investors.

While we’ve had this conversation many times since, it popped directly into my mind upon encountering two new “Uncommon Presentation” ads from Invesco. Each triggered very different reactions for me. First up, “It’s time to bench the benchmarks”:

This ad relays exactly the type of message I’d expect to see from Invesco or any firm with significant actively-managed offerings. It relays the need to build portfolios with more than just straightforward index (or low active share) strategies. The implication is for investors who buy into that concept to look at Invesco as someone who can offer solutions to plug into their portfolios. Makes perfect sense.

Next up, “Goodbye 60/40. Hello 50/30/20.”:

This ad leaves me less clear. The message is direct – investors need to shift from a traditional portfolio allocation to one that utilizes more alts – but the role Invesco can and will play is not. If the ad established Invesco as a leading alternatives provider, a firm that can help investors with the 20% allocation, that would fit. However, the ad is framed with and ultimately focused on overall portfolio construction (the 50/30/20).

This ties back to the issue we raised in the robo project: what role, exactly, does an intermediary-focused (i.e., non-direct) asset manager play in helping advisors and investors construct portfolios? At this moment, for the most part, I’d argue the answer is “not much”.

Of course maybe the ad is simply the jumping-off point for more discussion, which is fine. But I do think it illustrates two critical questions for most traditional, active, retail-centric asset managers to address:

  1. Is it feasible for us to be viewed as a key resource in portfolio construction or are we too far down the road of ceding that ground to our distributors, direct firms, and new entrants like robo-advisors?
  2. If it is feasible, what is our strategy?

The rash of robo-advisor acquisitions supports that idea that asset managers believe that becoming a more prominent resource for portfolio construction is feasible and necessary. But the messaging around these acquisitions has been carefully curated to be non-threatening to the status quo (i.e., “we’re doing this to help, not challenge, advisors”). And I don’t know that 20 different asset managers offering 20 nuanced robo platforms is an outcome, even in the short-term, that any single firm should view as favorable.

So when it comes to portfolio construction and the role asset managers wish to and can play in it, “what is our strategy?” is a more pressing question than ever.

The Most Overused Word in ETF Marketing

Posted by Mike McLaughlin on Feb 16, 2012, in Thoughts , tagged with , , ,

Innovation is the biggest cliche in ETF marketing.

This was reinforced for me yesterday after reading about the liquidation of 8 Global X ETFs. Having never checked out the Global X Web site, I went there and immediately encountered this:

We’ve been working with an emerging ETF provider on how to best position their product lineup, so I went back and reviewed notes on 6 other firms. Five of them prominently include innovation in their marketing messages:

  • As an innovator in exchange-traded funds…
  • …providing access to an innovative array of opportunities…
  • …provides innovative ways to enhance return potential…
  • …our track record of consistently creating innovative investment vehicles…
  • [firm] is an innovator in its field…

The definition of a cliche is something that has lost originality and impact through overuse. I believe that innovation has reached the point of having almost zero resonance with prospects and clients. It is a concept that everyone uses and tries to own, and therefore it has no power. Even when it might be factually true.

Now don’t get me started on solutions…