NYU marketing professor Scott Galloway described advertising as akin to a ‘turd floating in a swimming pool’ – suggesting that it interrupts an otherwise pleasant experience. For most people, advertising is an unwanted intrusion that offers little value. While advertising and communication, more generally, can deliver benefits to advertisers and is sometimes necessary, it is rarely […]

NYU marketing professor Scott Galloway described advertising as akin to a ‘turd floating in a swimming pool’ – suggesting that it interrupts an otherwise pleasant experience. For most people, advertising is an unwanted intrusion that offers little value.

While advertising and communication, more generally, can deliver benefits to advertisers and is sometimes necessary, it is rarely the key to a successful marketing strategy. Just ask Qantas. Reports suggest that Qantas invests more than $100 million on marketing-related communication, and while its awareness is high, brand image in 2023 is far from ideal. To quote a recent AFR article – ‘The research shows that fewer Australians are trusting Qantas because of factors related to reliability and customer service, and more of them are distrusting the airline because of poor service, as well as it being perceived to be a poor employer.’

What is more, no amount of advertising or public relations, for that matter, will repair the image and restore value to the Qantas brand or ensure it realises its potential. The impact of advertising is further limited by the finding that 75% of consumers do not believe the messages being communicated. But the real problem for Qantas goes deeper than this.

Scott Galloway once asked an audience – ‘What do Apple, Google, Netflix, Facebook, and Amazon have in common?’ Answering his own question – Galloway said – ‘a fucking great product’. He was right! Contrary to the view propagated by most advertising agencies that it is not “great creative” or a “great media plan” that sets a great brand apart. A ‘great product’ is the key. 

While Alan Joyce maintained that Qantas outperformed other airlines on most customer metrics – the consumer did not believe him. I don’t believe him. While Qantas has demonstrated, over recent years, a capacity to please shareholders, they have been less successful at pleasing consumers. The recent outcry over limiting the access of Qatar Airlines to Australia suggests that a good deal of its financial success comes from a lack of alternatives.

In considering the relative importance of the product, it is instructive to consider brands like Tesla, Zara, Rolls Royce, Krispy Kreme, Costco, and Patagonia. While all market leaders operate in competitive markets, none of these brands have advertising budgets. Instead of relying on advertising and communication, these brands have developed a great product – underpinned by the culture needed to support a great product. These brands also recognise that advertising has little to offer when it comes to repeat business, referral, and maximising the lifetime value of each customer.

Every great marketing campaign and, indeed, every sustainable business prioritises developing a great product. Advertising may be necessary for some businesses, but it may not be – especially if the business has a great product. And there is a volume of evidence suggesting that the better the product – the lower the need for advertising. The advertising budget of Apple as a percentage of revenue is 0.25%. In comparison, the advertising budget for Telstra as a percentage of revenue is 2% – and the advertising budget of IKEA as a percentage of revenue is 1%, half of Myer’s 2%.

D. John Carlson – Marketing Consultant Perth.