If the products the stars create are quality, I will buy. If not, I won't. Just because Jessica's or Martha's name is on something doesn't mean I will buy it. I will also only buy what I need and what works for me.

Hi Carolyn,

It will be interesting to see, in tougher economic times, whether consumers will adopt the attitude of "less is more". That is, will we purchase less, but make sure to purchase products of higher quality? You've given voice to what so many people out there are thinking. . . thanks for weighing in.

Initially I was intrigued by the commercials because I didn't know that so many star powered brands were sold at Macy's, or that some of the stars even had products. I actually enjoy seeing the celebrity personalities mixed in a playful way, BUT that's really the extent of it. I didn't run out to buy any Usher cologne, or Trump clothing just because of the spots. I'm only one consumer, but I would guess I am not alone here.

As far as customer service goes, it didn't even enter my mind as a factor until you mentioned it. It is important, no doubt, but in regards to fashion it wouldn't be the most important factor in the equation. I would be willing to endure sub par customer service if it were the only way I could obtain cutting edge fashion.

One question that has been on my mind ever since the campaign began is how well does all of this star power work together? Isn't there a risk of one star overshadowing all the others? Or even worse, does using so many stars dilute their star power and send a mussy, mediocre message?

I have not seen the new spots, but am aware of them. Amazingly enough, this will work with Macy's target audience. My feeling is that retailers should use "star quality" if it will work at driving sales - whether that tactic *should* work is a discussion for sociologists!

As for me, I would no more buy Donald Trump clothing than I would emulate his hairstyle! This sort of campaign would probably make me look elsewhere - but then I'm not a reader of People Magazine. I like a trendy combination of style and excellent service.

Thanks for your honest evaluation about Macy's new campaign, Chris. Good observations and excellent questions, too.

You've hit on something that I'd like to mention here: it seems that new advertising campaigns that have entertainment value are attracting and keeping viewers' attention. This is a continuing trend. Star power does reach consumers in a strong way.

However: will these ad spots be enough to woo consumers into Macy's stores? And if they do, will customer service create a positive or negative experience for consumers? Will the quality of star power and designer products be matched by stellar customer service--or will Macy's fall flat in this latter, and most important part of its business as a retailer? You know that department stores, Macy's included, has had its share of problems in trying to offer good, consistent customer service.

Your points about stars overshadowing each other, trying to outdo each other and diluting the effectiveness of the campaign are well taken, Chris. I hadn't thought about that, but I do think this has merit. What do other DF readers think about this?

Thanks for opining, Chris. Great stuff.

Frank,

I read your comments twice and can't stop chuckling. You're right: some consumers love the star power and the come-on of new hip designer labels to buy. Those consumers will probably go into Macy's to check out the latest and greatest. However, many consumers like you, will shop where they not only get trendy new styles, but where great service is a factor. For many, the promise of the latter is the greater motivator.

Thanks for writing, Frank. Much appreciated.

P.S. For the record: I haven't emulated Trump's hairstyle, either.

We love the spots. It's great to see such diverse celebrities interacting on the ads and Macy's should definitely use the starpower! Why not? These celebrities have lines for a reason - whether it is because they actually have talent in their clothing/product designs or if people simply like the name associated with it.

Personally we wouldn't buy anything that wasn't our taste or wasn't quality no matter whose name is associated with it but the general public isn't always the brightest eh?

In-fact if you want to study the flop rate of any of these celeb lines just scout the local discount stores which have accumulated an amass of x-celeb merch junk.

Hi Brick Marketing,

I'll bet lots of folks love these spots. Why not? They're entertaining and full of banter, music and celebrities.

My take on the product design issue is that fashion sells. Some consumers are more quality-conscious than others. Some buy to trends and the planned obsolescence of some fashion-oriented products is more pronounced than others so long-term quality isn't a primary concern. Different strokes for different folks, you know?

Thanks for weighing in, BM. Your input is always appreciated.

Good point, Levon. We'll see how long it takes for some of these designer and celebrity-branded products to show up at TJ Maxx, Marshall's, etc. Some of these home and apparel fashions will fly, and some just won't make it. . .even with the cachet of celebrity behind them.

Thanks for reminding us that while there are notable designer successes at retail, there are just as many failures, Levon.

Ted,

I enjoy the adds and believe they are effective with certain audiences, such as young people who want to be like (put celebrity name here) and other fashion-conscious shoppers who believe that celebrities wouldn't put their personal brand at risk. (Hmm, really?)

As for me, if I can't get it at discount with great customer service, I don't want it. (That's not asking for too much, is it?)

Haven't seen the ads & have no interest in celeb shills. But I don't like having "real" designers' names emblazoned on my clothes, etc., either. I've never understood this phenomenon of "if X wears/uses it, I want to!" I agree with Levon that we'll be seeing a lot of this crap, I mean, merchandise, at TJ Maxx (does that place still exist?)

But can anyone explain the new VW campaign that features, in one spot, Shawn Fanning of Napster?

Hi Lewis,

Loved it: "As for me, if I can't get it at discount with great customer service, I don't want it. (That's not asking for too much, is it?)" Spoken like a true mature male shopper. Way to go!

Seriously, though: the ads are entertaining and no doubt, they are hitting their targeted customers. . .the fashion-conscious and name-droppers among us. Thanks for your ever-honest, direct comments. They're always appreciated, Lewis.

I have seen both ads in English and Spanish. They are creative and entertaining; however, I was confused on what Mariah Carey and Carlos Santana were selling. May be the point is creating awareness that they have merchandise in Macy’s, create curiosity and drive store traffic.

Although these ads got my attention the first time, I found myself skipping or not paying attention a second time. I know that they have celebrity brand merchandise after their Christmas commercial, which makes me wonder what effect on sales will have a continuation of the celebrity campaign. But then again, I am not their target audience. I would not go to buy a product just because it has a celebrity brand name.

As far star power overshadowing each other, I think that they are not competing. They are providing merchandise for different target audiences that identify with each brand personality.

Good point, Patricia. Many consumers don't especially like to have designer names emblazoned all over their clothes. You're far from being alone on that score.

"But can anyone explain the new VW campaign that features, in one spot, Shawn Fanning of Napster?" Ahyone in the DF blogosphere familiar with this ad spot? I haven't seen it yet. . .

Thanks, Patricia, for weighing in on this. I appreciate it.

Hi Javier,

Thanks for taking the time to address many of the issues raised in my post, as well as comments that have been made to it.

It will be interesting to see whether this campaign will be of short duration or not. Many viewers, as you pointed out, lose interest and basically shut out the ads once they've seen them. You also made another good observation: what were some of these celebrities actually selling? And will sales be positively impacted for a protracted period of time? Excellent questions that will only be answered in time.

Personally, I'm not sure whether packing the spots with a number of celebrities adds to the impact, or detracts since, as you point out, their personal brands speak to very different consumer targets.. .or maybe that is the point. Now you've got me thinking, Javier.

Thanks for the great input. Loved it.

I guess I can see how these spots may work for the celebrities to bring awareness to their products. But is it really bringing awareness to Macy's? Why not buy Carols Santana's shoes at Zappos?

Hi Bill,

To answer your question: "That all depends."

To cite your example, Macy's may be selling to a different group of consumers than Zappos, and the Santana brand may offer different design selections in each retail outlet, for that reason. At least, it would be reasonable to expect the assortments might be different.

I do think the spots will bring attention to Macy's but for how long before consumers tire of them? As Javier pointed out, once he had seen the spots, he tuned them out.

Given the tough, competitive retail sector, it won't take long to find out whether the new Macy's campaign is a hit or a miss.

Thanks for weighing in, Bill. You always contribute good thoughts to these conversations and I appreciate it.

My theory is that department stores are having to compete with hip boutiques that specialize in trendy, independent labels. Partnering with celebrities is a good way, I suppose, to build exclusive, niche brands with instant name recognition into the vast dept. store model -- more than just an in-house label (I think Macy's is I.N.C.).

The problem, as I see it (and I don't know much), is that Macy's has chosen stars who are better known for tackiness (Jessica S.), trashiness (Mariah), crudeness (Trump) or anything BUT fashion (Santana)

Patricia,

Your statement is an insightful one: "Partnering with celebrities is a good way, I suppose, to build exclusive, niche brands with instant name recognition into the vast dept. store model -- more than just an in-house label."

It's interesting to see how different people have vastly different brand images of celebrities. Many probably feel as you do about the celebs you've cited. Still others attribute the following brand characteristics to them: Jessica S., pop queen icon and trendy jet-setting 20 something; Mariah, internationally famous one-of-a-kind vocal diva; Trump, crafty deal-maker and business mogul; Santana, iconic rock band founder and arguably a guitarist without equal, except for Eric Clapton. . .

All well-known, powerful brands are open to individual perception and personal interpretation. The devotees of the cited brands will no doubt flock to Macy's to celebrate their icons.

Strong brands will never be all things to all people, Patricia. That's what you've basically said in your comments, and I thank you for being so honest and stating your opinions.

Good topic, Ted. The nice thing about the marketplace is that there's usually something for everyone. For those consumers who are influenced by star power and endorsements, this Macy's spot may be very effective.

The viewers who enjoy the spots' entertainment value but are not motivated by celebs in their purchase decision making, can still manage to spread the word simply by discussing the spots with others.

And then there's the geriatric demographic who may have been solid Macy's customers in past years asking, "Who's Usher?" :)

I think the primary effect of these ads is to improve and differentiate the Macy's brand. As others have noted above, the names in question have star value, even if that star value does not relate directly to the product being offered.

This is no different that Jessica Simpson promoting a soft drink or Pizza Hut. She has nothing to do with the product, but she is likeable and transfers that likability to the advertiser Macy's and the product.

I find it very odd when advertisers will agree to spend (waste?) $100 million on a campaign. That's a lot of designer purses they must sell to justify the cost. Could they not have achieved the same goal for less money?

I've seen the spots too..quite entertaining, although I could live without seeing Jessica Simpson AGAINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.

I always attack any marketing challenge/project with my "consumer" hat on. And as a consumer, yes, I would check out new and different products, that's the fun of shopping.

Once I'm in the store, however, that's another story. Long lines, rude, apathetic sales staff are a real turnoff, no matter whose name is attached to a product.

Macy's has a lot of work to do to get itself back in the good graces of a lot of customers--myself included. Much as I love Martha Stewart and her products, I could live without them if the shopping experience isn't what I deserve.

As I stood for a half hour waiting to be assisted in the purchase of a high-end designer handbag for my Mom, I happened to glance up at a sign that says, "That's the magic of Macy's." I chuckled to myself, "More like the MISERY of Macy's."

Loved your comments, Elaine. They are 'spot on', as our British friends say. ;)Thanks for opining.

You've made a good point, David. Many celebs today hawk everything from fashion apparel to sneakers, soft drinks and fast food. . .Some of them probably have enough star power among their fans to persuade them to purchase the products they endorse. But it's more likely these days that they can help to sell or retool the image of particular retailers for various demographics.

Thanks for making such good observations, David. I appreciate it.

Cam,

You're right: $100 million is a lot of money for Macy's to put out to help glamorize its image and to woo customers. Having said that, retailers are facing tough uphill battles right now. That's partly due to consumers' economic constraints these days and partly their own fault. The erosion of department stores' customer bases to more service-oriented specialty operations has been ongoing for quite a while now. "Desperate times call for desperate measures".

I'd also point out that $100 million is a drop in a bucket in the way of modern advertising expenditures. . .think Coca Cola, Toyota, AT&T, etc.

Thanks for weighing in, Cam. I appreciate it.

Dawn,

You and I have discussed this very issue on a past post, and I thank you for adding your voice to this discussion, as well.

"Once I'm in the store, however, that's another story. Long lines, rude, apathetic sales staff are a real turnoff, no matter whose name is attached to a product."

Exactly. This is the problem that Macy's, and every other major retailer has had for decades--not just a few short years now. Inconsistent, or apathetic customer service interactions kill the opportunity retailers like Macy's have once they've gotten customers to come into their stores, lured by the promise of exciting, trendy new product lines.

If Macy's, as the retail example in this post, could only align its store experiences for customers with its advertising message--delivering "magic" and not "misery", as you've so eloquently stated, they'd have a real shot at winning signficantly more business.

Thanks for checking in again, Dawn. Loved your comments and insights.

While I am not in marketing myself, observing why and how people market (sell) ideas and things prepares me to be a smart consumer.

I grew up in the West with Macy's being the 'Alpha' store in the most prestigious malls; shopping there was 'Big League Shopping.' I like this Advertising series attempts at merging that shopping setting with up-scale, and classic celebrities and products. When the 'hyped' products and service consistently meet Macy's' image as marketed, demand is created, and satisfied.

William,

Thanks for weighing in with a West coast perspective on this. There can be no doubt that Macy's is trying to make its image more hip and upscale with the addition of so many new designer and celebrity product lines. Image is one thing, but delivering the quality of merchandise and the service consumers demand these days is another. That's where Macy's has fallen down in the past, as you can see from previous comments that have been posted. In order to satisfy the demand Macy's is creating, they must deliver when it comes to the crucial aspect of customer service. Otherwise, this very expensive, creative campaign, as well as the collaboration with all of these celebrities, will be pointless.

Thanks for adding to this conversation, William. I appreciate it.