A.) For the last several days I’ve been noticing several different UP RR’s new ads that feature a profile of the UP Shield in several different settings. Theshield of UP is certainly a recognizable logo and has a lot of recognition.
B.) NS has come out with a new campaign as well featuring a group of running white lines through the photographic copy ending with the lines matching to those on a locomotive.
C.) CSX has also been running a stylized graphic representation of their ‘boxcar outline’ . From their on-going campaign
I think it (CSX’s) is kind of an interesting approach, and provides a certain continuity to their on-going campaign that introduced the ‘ton of freight for a gallon of gas’ catch phrase.
I like NS’s campaign it seems to be interesting, and holds one attention for the term of the ad. I do not think it will get the recognoition of their former ‘Lonesome gallon’ campaign.
UP has a door to door logistics message, but I have real mixed emotions about it. It seems to be kind of flat. But that is onl;y my perception. I wish they had picked up some of the on-line scenes of startling scenery and sunsets or sunrises. [Of Course, any of their Heritage Fleet would have been welcome, and absolutely, 844 or 3985 would have really jazzed things up. But again, That’s just my feelings.
I am curious to hear what others here think of the various advertising campaigns, and their individual takes on the ADs effectiveness, or lack there of…
{ Wonder if BNSF is going to join the Fray, and field an Ad campaign of their own?}
Well, the UP’s door to door message is what jumped out at me. That is the key.
A railroad can’t use a traditional carload operation and be service competitive with trucks. It can’t happen. There are too many events between origin and destination, each with a chance of failure, to be service competitive with a truck when using a conventional operation. In addition to the service problems, each of these “events” has a cost which drives up overall rail cost and further adversly impacts the competitive posistion of rail vs. truck.
So the railroads have to operate an intermodal system to be service competitive with trucks. (Intermodal eliminates a lot of those pesky “events”.) But traditionally intermodal was priced on a rail terminal to rail terminal basis. This didn’t work either on anything but longer hauls. And most freight moves shorter distances.
To make things work the railroads need to estabilsh door to door intermodal pricing with the rail “division” sliding acording to the trucking costs. I know the BNSF and NS have figured this out and now it looks as if the UP has too. (An intermodal move can well be in a boxcar. )
I’m convinced the non-starter terminal to terminal pricing was a legacy of economic regulation by the Federal Government. The Feds wouldn’t let the railroads do the door to door thing except on a very limited basis.
Going to the UP web site as a result of the commercial; I saw they have established an “Onboarding” team to assist new customers in using rail service. That is a huge step forward.
My wife and I saw one of the UP ads recently, and her first question was “why would a railroad advertise on TV?” Her thought is that we don’t purchase anything from railroads and what do they have to gain by TV ads. I reminded here that pretty much everything we purchase has been on a train. Also that the ads point to the environmental benefits of trains and how (in the case of CSX ads) trains help ease congestion on railroads. Being in the marketing industry, I think the campaigns are great good will ideas that put on positive and somewhat “human” face on railroads. I reminded my wife that unlike railfans, most people view railroads with either no opinion or with disdain when they have to wait at a grade crossing. I think it’s a great idea! Keep 'em comin!
Just realized I said that in CSX ads, they point out that trains can help ease congestion on RAILroads. Oops! I obviously meant ease congestion on roads…
Ads in the mass media (TV, radio, general circulation newspapers, etc.) by businesses that don’t sell directly to the public are not a new thing. I can remember television ads by United States Steel in the 1960’s that pushed “innovation”. The current ad campaign by the California dairy farmers is similar since most consumers don’t have much choice when they buy their milk over which cows it came from.
Would be interesting to see how effective those ads are. Do they actually generate new business or perhaps bring in people who want to work for the railroad? Hard to imagine that a shipper sees those ads and thinks “gee…the railroad…never thought of that”.
I think the railroads are trying to decrease the NIMBY feelings in the general public. Showing the public the benefit that railroads bring to their community and their lives could make them a little more willing to let the RR expand.
My guess is that the public advertising has to be viewed as a positive influence on public perception of things railroad related.
Similarily, several years back there was a flurry of papers writtewn referencing the Medical Profession and the perception of doctors in the eyes of their patients. The thrust of that argument was that the Doctor/Patient relationship was in trouble from the standpoint of the patients perception of the doctor, particularly where "bedside manner’ was problematic.
The argument made that many doctors had the bedside manners that lay somewhere between Attila the Hun and Ghengis Khan. With the patients they were somewhat non-communicative and very abrupt telling (or ordering) the treatment protocols for the patient.
The patients were left swinging in the breeze as to information referencing THEIR conditions and having no expectations or what to expect next. The Doctor/Patient relationship began to evolve into an adversarial relationship. The patiient was left guessing as to outcomes. So if the proceedures did not live up to the patient’s expectations or expected results (a cure). The next step was to find a lawyer and sue the doctor.
Which raised the effected doctor’s insurance premiums and circumstances were then escalation on the part of the doctor.
So someone within the medical community put two and two togethaer and realized that there was a behaviorial modification needed by the doctors. The reward being a better Docto/Patient relationship and reduction of the doctors costs.
Soimilarily, it could be analogous to the Railroad Industry and the General Public (some of whom comprise the railroad’s service purchasing customers.) The advertising could help smooth attitudes on both sides of the issue for the railroads and the public.
All that then has to be done is a thinning of the Lawyers Herd, and ‘Bob’s Your Uncle!’
I think the RRs are trying to drum up support in their fight to stop significant re-regulation. They are trying to look like “the good guys”. (Which, of course, they are!) [:)]
I have taken a few marketing courses lately and from the information you all have provided in the posts, I have come up with a few things that I have learned.
While RR advertising has been small recently they have always advertised in their own way. Some people say they advertise by the graphics used on the locomotives. That may be true, but an advertisement is the paid placement of a message. I think it is great they are trying to reach out more to the public.
I just thought of a great commercial that just about any one RR could use to get their point to the average consumer. There could be a slide show of pictures everyday objects placed on the screen that fades to a new object. After about ten or so of those are shown a narrator can say something like “What do all of these objects have in common?” Then the next shot shows a train and the narrator says “They are all shipped by rail.”
If a general message to the public is the purpose then why not a pooled effort and resources through the American Association of Railroads? The message might highlight train verses truck stats on energy consumption, carbon footprint and safety record. Otherwise the lay viewer might well ask why the heck CSX or NS is advertising on TV…the average housewife or kid who makes up the general viewing audience isn’t in the market for rail services.
I haven’t seen the UP ad yet. When the ad campaign was announced to employees it was described as being targeted to potential customers that had never used a railroad before. Many of them probably thinking that a railroad couldn’t supply their transportation needs. So I don’t think it’s hard to imagine a shipper thinking, “gee…the railroad…never thought of that.”
Time will tell whether it will bring in new business.
Now about those customers the railroad used to have but either chased or let slip away. The ones who say, “gee…the railroad…never again.”
The AAR is a anonymous entity to the general public. The carriers themselves have a physical presence in their serving area…people actually see the locomotive and at least psychologically acknowledge the presence of the railroads. The AAR would be unknown except to those of us who are knowledgeable about the industry.
All these ads appear in mid October of an election year. Those who would be deciding on re-regulation are back “home.” Meet and greet those you hardly ever see for the rest of your term. A challenger has been doing so while you were in Washington.
Plant the warm and huggy railroad in voters mind. Tie into the gospel of the Jolly Green Gaia so many worship beyond reason. Constituents conscious of the wonderful green railroad will tell the candidate so.
Selling playing cards with the company logo in the bar car is no longer how the public is reminded of the railroad.
I think the second commercial in this video could still have some significance for the average American consumer. Giving for inflation, the half cent a pound equals about 2.5 cents a pound in the cost to transport food in today’s market, if that is what the RRs charge today.
“Door-to-door” rate plans were first adopted for intermodal service by the US Rail Industry well over 45 years ago. It was called “Plan II”.
These were the “Intermodal Rate Plans” approved by the ICC in 1965, having evolved from a similar structure established by the ICC in 1954. Southern Pacific established door-to-door TOFC service in 1953. Per se, “Plan II” has been around for nearly 60 years and, in turn, it had evolved from long-established LCL marketing strategies employed by many railroads. The 1965 structure followed by the rail industry is as follows:
Plan I: Carriage by railroad of trailers of common carrier truckers at a flat charge per trailer – a “substituted” service performed for the trucker who solicits the business and bills the shipper.
Plan II: Railroad performs all of the service, including the furnishing of the trailer, loading and unloading, and pick-up and delivery.
Plan II 1/4: Railroad performs pick-up at origin, but cosignee must arrange for delivery at destination.
Plan II 1/2: Railroad performs ramp-to-ramp service only.
Plan II 3/4: Shipper delivers railroad trailers/containers to ramp; rail
I think there’s an indirect way that advertising can improve the railroads’ image. We’ve all seen news reports of crossing accidents where the big bad train comes speeding out of nowhere and hits the poor unsuspecting victims. If the railroad is a customer, I believe the tone of the report would be a little different.
I posted this because I was struck that at least three of the major carriers had gone into this national media campaign mode. The timing was interesting ( in the winding down of a mid-term election year, and surely wha will be a kick off to the 2012 Presidential Vampaign season). One poster mentioned that the advertisements might be a way to soften some of the NIMBY related issues as well. At first I thought the UP’s ads were somewhat restrained in their message presentation, while the CSX’s and NS’s by use of a musical hook were attention grabing, to appeal to the general public. UP was, it seemed to me to be making a more restrained approach, to appeal to conservative business; and potential customers. UPS’ "logistics’ based advertising seems to make an appeal to all potential customer in their target base.