• Dear Oakley,

    Posted on May 30th, 2007 by and currently 4 commenting.

    You make me sad.

    I have been a big fan since my college days and my first pair of e-wires. And I still have a few of your sunglasses that I run and cycle in from time-to-time, although you’ve been replaced with Ray-Ban for my everyday wear. But, like I said, I’m still a big fan.

    And then you went and did something uncharacteristic. This week you sent me a 22-page pamphlet. Six pages of it were product. The other 16 were you trying to explain your technology behind your polarized lenses. Yes, the big, colorful graphics were nice. But you took 16 pages trying to explain something to me that you could’ve done in two. And the paper you printed it on was cheap. Super-cheap as a matter-of-fact. Uncharacteristically cheap.

    To top is all off, there was the insert. You know, the one with the coupon that asks me to send you back some information about one of my friends so you can send him/her the same lame pamphlet. And as a ‘reward,’ you’ll send us both an Oakley decal. Seriously. Do you think that we’re excited about getting a freakin’ decal after we spend $130 on a pair of sunglasses? Do you think that’s enough of a reward to make me want to take time out to look up a friend’s info, fill out the card and drop it in the mail?

    Whoever convinced you to do this needs to get smacked on the back of the head. You’re better than this, Oakley. Much better. Don’t stoop to levels that you don’t need to stoop to. Start acting like the brand you are. We’ll all be better off for it.

  • http://www.rms.biz Joe O

    A couple of weeks ago I went to see GREASE at the regional theatre in the local city. The performance was excellent (even if the book of the show is one of the worst of all time that’s why they changed it so much for the movie script). In the program was a pink piece of paper with random questions about the theatre, suggestions for their 25th season, etc…

    Okay, my wife and I just donated a chunk of money and bought tickets to see the show. This little pink piece of paper was disgraceful! It was rambling, there was no room to respond on the paper, and there were no instructions about where to turn it in. When the ED introduced the show no mention was made of the paper. Alas, delving further into the program the 25th anniversary season has all ready been chosen and the shows are listed!!

    I am in the process of writing a book, “In My Grandmother’s House: Uncommon Sense”, I will be sure to make mention of this experience in the HOW NOT to elicit decent feedback section. Embarrassing!

  • http://brainsonfire.com Spike

    You go, Joe. Sometimes people just don’t think. And there is a lot of messaging out there that is not only “off-brand,” but just plain doesn’t make sense. Thanks for the comment.

  • http://bicycledesign.blogspot.com James

    That Oakley booklet bothered me as well. I had already seen it in Bike, Outside, or one of the other similar magazines that I receive. The glued in insert in the middle of the magazine annoyed me, so I promptly pulled it out and threw it away. When I received the same booklet by mail a few days ago, I was more than a little annoyed. I can only assume that Oakley got my name from a list that came from one of those magazines, so why did they think that I really needed another copy of that booklet? Throwing it away the first time was enough. Now I have to feel guilty about wasting twice as much paper. Thanks Oakley.

  • http://ardixiv.blogspot.com Pieter Ardinois

    This happens really often when it comes to printed communication, these days. Could it be that marketing budgets are shifting towards new media communication and underestimating the power of printed communication? Could the reason be that print providers are just craftsmen and not marketeers? I think that the printing industry (when it comes to advertisement) needs to rethink itself by looking further than just monetizing ink on paper.