Commentary on the green game

I’m a big proponent of being green. When I’m not utilizing public transportation I drive a hybrid, I try diligently to bring along canvas bags whenever I’m out shopping and I’ve stopped buying bottled water for my home and office (instead I drink tap). In short, I’m making behavior modifications – and I don’t pretend there isn’t more I could be doing. But one thing I will not do is buy my way into responsibility via purchasing carbon offsets. IMHO carbon offsets are the lazy person’s road to good consciousness. And it seems like they’re becoming corporate America’s answer to environmental friendliness. It’s great that so many organizations are trying to reduce their carbon footprints and invest in sustainability (or whatever other buzz phrases they’re using today). Even tradeshows are getting into the action. The Consumer Electronics Show which purportedly created some 20,000 tons of carbon was planning on using carbon offsets to make good on the pollution it was causing. Carbon offsets represent big money. According to a recent New York Times article the US spent more than $54 million in 2007 purchasing offsets. While it can be argued that purchasing carbon offsets is better than doing nothing I’m not sure that we should be praising corporations for taking the lazy way out. Wouldn’t it be more constructive to reduce the behavior creating the carbon? One blog (I would love to give credit but I can’t remember which blog I read it on, sorry…) recently suggested not participating in trade shows, instead communicate your lack of a presence. It’s a strategy that would probably gain more exposure for a fraction of the cost of participating. Or invest in new technology to solve old problems. Stock your store with Badgerland Poly’s biodegradable plastic bags (though Whole Food’s ban on plastic bags is a better approach). The point is, don’t rely on carbon offsets as your participation in the “green” arena. Make the conversation honest and your buyers are more likely to respond. For some inspiration on what your company can do read Marketing Green’s Corporations Foster Dialogue on the Environment post for some good examples of companies speaking honestly about their investment in being green.

Experitential Marketing via the illy Push Button House

The experience is over, but it's a great example of experiential marketing nonetheless. This past December illy parked their Push Button House in the Time Warner Center in NYC. The Push Button House, designed by architect Adam Kalkin, is contained within an old shipping container, which at the push of button unfolds to reveal a cafe. The Push Button house was the catalyst for illy to grab attention and showcase their new Francis X7 Hyper Espresso System, available this coming April. Visitors could sit in the sleek white cafe and experience an espresso made by the Hyper Espresso System. Timed perfectly with the holiday shopping season I'm sure the Push Button Cafe proved a happy respite for many shoppers in need of a caffeine jolt. What would have been even better for illy would have been to capture the attention and wallets of said spent shoppers with pre-sales of the espresso system, perhaps with a mini replica to put under the tree. With that shoppers would have gotten the jolt they were looking for with the added benefit of wrapping up their gift lists, and all within an old shipping crate.

Critisism of LEED and why it's good

The checklist created by the U.S. Green Building Council, creators of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system has been under increasing scrutiny (read one of the latest criticisms here). A Google search of criticism of LEED yields 203,000 results. LEED does have some shortcomings so the criticism is fair (for the most part), but any rating system is bound to have its faults. The important thing is that the U.S. Green Building Council take the criticism under advisement and continue to evolve its rating system. However, the U.S. Green Building Council should be ecstatic about the criticism. It proves the increasing receptiveness of government agencies, businesses, even individuals in embracing green design. With this type of attention green design is apt to be embraced by even more people, creating more green buildings and resulting in a better place for all of us to live. To that, I say congratulations.

A new trend? Grocers taking a social stand through banning products

I’m not sure you can classify this as a trend but there’s another grocer in the news taking a social stand by banning a product. First was Whole Foods war against plastic bags and now Wegmans Food Markets announced today that it will cease selling tobacco products in all of its 71 stores. The decision, according to CEO Danny Wegman, was made in part due to “…the destructive role smoking plays in health.” Could this be the next differentiator among grocery store chains; aligning social responsibly ideals by banning products? It creates an interesting dialogue between the consumer and the grocer. Akin to if you believe everyone should do their part shop here to show your support. It certainly brings a more positive association and perhaps an affinity to a chore very few of us like to do.

Massachusetts' auto dealers lose their right to use the asterisk

Massachusetts’ auto dealers have had their right to use an asterisk taken away. Eight Massachusetts’ auto dealers have been slapped with fines for abusive asterisk pricing. While the auto industry does rely heavily on the asterisk they are not the only industry to use the now defamed typographical symbol. Asterisk pricing can be deceptive to the uniformed consumer, but is it so harmful that consumers in Massachusetts need their state to dedicate resources to crafting its demise? And isn’t it a bit short sighted to regulate the asterisk within only one industry? Asterisk pricing allows a company to show their best price, even though some restrictions might apply. It helps to create a competitive advantage over competing ads in like-ad saturated circulars. While you could argue that the asterisk is the lazy marketers’ attempt at price competitiveness, it does serve a purpose when used correctly. And shouldn’t we trust that the consumers we are speaking to are educated enough to know that an asterisk denotes that there is more information to read. Of course after writing that last sentence I realize that we don’t have enough trust in consumers to not use a hair dryer in the shower without directive. So perhaps the regulation of the asterisk is just one more nail in Darwin’s coffin.