|
||||||||
Why on Earth did Lord Sugar say not to listen to the market research? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Quote from slouchingthatch on another thread:
'On the subject of focus groups, it appeared from the edit that Francesca launched in and asked the group what they thought of their concept, which then led them down the "I don't like it" line. This is totally the wrong way to conduct a focus group. You don't just launch in and ask them the big question because it's a totally leading question. The way to approach it is to start with some gentle open questions about whether they have used such sites before, what they would be looking for, what sort of things would reassure them or put them off. Then, once you have warmed them up and established a baseline, you show them the concept and ask them to comment. (Again, open questions, not "Do you like it, then?") The problem with launching straight in is that if you jump straight to the concept cold you will only ever get surface reactions - and, worse than that, a conversation dominated by one or two people's immediate reaction to it. I get the sense this is what Francesca and Neil did - indeed, it's what most Apprentice teams seem to do when conducting research. Focus groups are not about jumping quickly to a yes/no answer, they're about getting to understand people's deeper motivations and preferences.' Maybe Lord Sugar's comment did make sense after all then. Maybe he meant less that they shouldn't listen, but that they handled their focus groups wrongly and didn't get the right information out of them. As I said, if they'd done what Ashleigh did last year - just go out on the street and talk to people - they could have done a lot better. Lord Sugar's comment was very confusing though. It definitely implied that they shouldn't listen to the market research, and that makes no sense because it's the polar opposite of what everyone is taught. If he had the time to explain it further - and let's face it, 90% of viewers couldn't care less about the finer point of it - I suspect he would say that market research, like any other form of business data, is valuable information that any sensible businessperson would be a fool to ignore. But data should never do more than inform a decision - you should never assume it means you should switch off your common sense. An analogy - market research as sat navs. Sat nav systems help us to get from A to B. But sometimes they go awry. If your Tom Tom tells you to drive off that cliff ahead of you, do you follow it slavishly, or do you use your common sense to realise that it must be wrong and you should therefore ignore it? What Evolve's focus group told them last night was the equivalent of driving off a cliff - be really dull, really boring and make it utterly unexciting. |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I think the advert was attacked unfairly to be honest, because I've seen enough daytime tv to know that 50+ advertising is often in a similar vein. Also, I have a hobby of reading lonely hearts ads (I find it fun to match adverts together
), and the line that comes up most often is 'friendship, maybe more'. If they'd gone for a slightly more friendship-orientated angle and upped the tempo, there'd be no room for complaints at all. |
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,842
|
Quote:
You have a point. But where Evolve fell down for me was that they heard the words, but didn't draw the right insights from them. And there is no excuse for producing an ad as excruciatingly dull as theirs was.
I agree about the insight though - they pretty much took the market research 100% percent literally, rather than building their own ideas on top of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Eh, when I have a sick day (or watch ITV3 of an evening), none of the adverts seem a great deal more out there to be honest (better produced and more refined of course, but then they wouldn't be produced in a coupe of days either).
I agree about the insight though - they pretty much took the market research 100% percent literally, rather than building their own ideas on top of it. In truth, neither ad was great. Endeavour's at least had some semblance of a message to it, and while Evolve's wasn't Octi-Kleen bad, it seemed clear to me that they just hadn't got it right and could have done so much better. You're probably right, though, it was made to sound a million times worse than it actually was in the boardroom (and at the presentation). |
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
Its the voice overs I never understand, don't they get actors to act or are they just extra's who don't get paid to speak.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Rebel County
Posts: 17,761
|
I'm flummoxed as to why they bothered with the market research.
If the initial idea was to set the dating site up as they would to their own age group, but make it for +50s, then they should've had all the ideas from what they would like. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,168
|
The focus group they talked to was all wrong.
The participants seemed to be much older than 50 - more like 70+ than 50+, and also didn't actually LOOK like the types of people who would be interested in an online dating site. I'm in my my mid 50s, and to be honest, if I wasn't happily married, would be looking at a site more like CuffLinks than Friendship and Flowers to find a new relationship. Like most Baby Boomers, I feel like a recycled teenager, have the attitude that 50 is the new 30, dress fashionably, try to look my best, have a fair bit of disposable income and definitely don't feel quite ready for God's Waiting Room just yet. I couldn't believe the naffness of the ad they produced it was like one of of those cheap locally produced adverts shown on regional telly, rather than a mock up of an ad to anchor a major campaign. Open a site called Bubbles and Bonking aimed at the 40+ market and you'd have a winner! |
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,217
|
Quote:
With respect - that is a load of cods wallop!
Ad agency staff are generally young, and manage to create material suitable for all age groups be it babies, children, their peers or older people...... Having personal knowledge of all markets is impossible - which is why focus groups are used.... To give the perspective which the creative team lack! In the real world, something like this would be developed over weeks if not months, and would involve more than one focus group to ensure that skewed results didn't send them off in the wrong direction. On the limited evidence they had, their focus group (which did seem to be from the upper end of the age range) were saying that they didn't like what was proposed - although as we saw very little of the actual questions they were asked its very possible that they were asked leading questions..... And in the real world you wouldn't do market research by talking to 4 unrepresentative people in a pub. The candidates were completely right in their analysis that they had no idea what "old" people did. They didn't realise that their market research was useless because they had nothing else to judge it on, and had no experience to judge how to do that. You would hope that a PhD student would realise that "over 50" would need definition, and would lead to lots of subgroups - but Jason appears to be someone who has stayed in the pure history field, and doesn't venture into practical areas. He seemed to fit the stereotype of someone who has narrow skills, is a bit unworldly, and is more suited to spending 3 years researching an issue - rather than making quick decisions. Thats probably why they cast him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
Quote:
I'm flummoxed as to why they bothered with the market research.
If the initial idea was to set the dating site up as they would to their own age group, but make it for +50s, then they should've had all the ideas from what they would like. |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Rebel County
Posts: 17,761
|
Quote:
Open a site called Bubbles and Bonking aimed at the 40+ market and you'd have a winner!
![]() Dramatic voiceover "Too young to be put on the shelf? Too old to be picked up by some sleaze in a bar? Then you need... Bubbles and Bonking!!!" Cue some good looking +40 in a bubble bath with a glass of champagne. And Herbert comes splashing up gasping for air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Rebel County
Posts: 17,761
|
Quote:
Agree people in their 50's now were only born early 60's late 50's so it's not as if their "old and set in their ways" they grew up with the "Summer of Love" and all that.
Simply call the site GenX, and had an ad being a bit of a joke on trends like love-ins and punk, and you're set. |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,128
|
Quote:
The focus group they talked to was all wrong.
The participants seemed to be much older than 50 - more like 70+ than 50+, and also didn't actually LOOK like the types of people who would be interested in an online dating site. I'm in my my mid 50s, and to be honest, if I wasn't happily married, would be looking at a site more like CuffLinks than Friendship and Flowers to find a new relationship. Like most Baby Boomers, I feel like a recycled teenager, have the attitude that 50 is the new 30, dress fashionably, try to look my best, have a fair bit of disposable income and definitely don't feel quite ready for God's Waiting Room just yet. I couldn't believe the naffness of the ad they produced it was like one of of those cheap locally produced adverts shown on regional telly, rather than a mock up of an ad to anchor a major campaign. Open a site called Bubbles and Bonking aimed at the 40+ market and you'd have a winner! |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Sticks
Posts: 711
|
Quote:
that sounds terrible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,077
|
Quote:
I'll do your ad.
![]() Dramatic voiceover "Too young to be put on the shelf? Too old to be picked up by some sleaze in a bar? Then you need... Bubbles and Bonking!!!" Cue some good looking +40 in a bubble bath with a glass of champagne. And Herbert comes splashing up gasping for air. ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 629
|
Quote:
Personally, i'd sign up for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,128
|
Quote:
Personally, i'd sign up for it.
Omg lol. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Sticks
Posts: 711
|
Quote:
'Bonking'???? Its the most un-erotic/ghastly word in the english language.
Omg lol. ![]() ![]() ![]() I'm quite pro-bonking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 147
|
The main problem is if one makes and sells a product they have to have some idea what its about. It has noting to do with market research. Dating sites need all ages. Since they were far from the age they went for and had no idea about it, what people that age are looking for, or better put how they go about looking for it they had a disaster on their hands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,128
|
Quote:
You're quite right, but they'd have sold me on the idea of bonking itself, rather than the word
![]() I'm quite pro-bonking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 361
|
Self-contradiction and hypocrisy is like a mantra for him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Self-contradiction and hypocrisy is like a mantra for him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
I agree with LAS on this one when he said why did you listen to a focus group who were actually not really your target group, but I blame the producers for making up that focus group and Neil and Fran for not actually realising they were the wrong group and hitting the streets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,009
|
Simple answer.... Mr Alan Sugar, for he has never earned anything other than a few mediocre grades at O level, is a sheer idiot.
Quite a pathetic plebutente. |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Simple answer.... Mr Alan Sugar, for he has never earned anything other than a few mediocre grades at O level, is a sheer idiot.
Quite a pathetic plebutente. |
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Simple answer.... Mr Alan Sugar, for he has never earned anything other than a few mediocre grades at O level, is a sheer idiot.
Quite a pathetic plebutente. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:31.





), and the line that comes up most often is 'friendship, maybe more'. If they'd gone for a slightly more friendship-orientated angle and upped the tempo, there'd be no room for complaints at all.
Omg lol.