THREAD:

So, ever noticed how fast food outlets, particularly those with chicken, are rolling with the whole catchy and sometimes divisive marketing lately? If you haven't, read on. It's the pilot #MarketingMonday. This is me right now (yes, I'm also very nervous):

This is the first edition of #MarketingMondays and this will be a weekly attempt to analyze historical and current marketing excellence as well as marketing fails of brands (organizational or individual) in Zimbabwe and around the globe.

I need to make it known that this is for mostly for conversational purposes and I'll try to be as factual as possible. Unlike disciplines like law or medicine, marketing is heavily nuanced and there’s really no right or wrong way to express yourself creatively, you feel me?

There are, however, principles such as psychology and context that will determine whether your marketing efforts are a success or not. This really is just me blogging so intend to have tons of fun with it, hoping you will too! Now that the housekeeping is done, let's jump into it

We’ll jump straight into what caused a stir last week in the Zimbabwean marketing scene: the infamous @mamboschicken advert, its implications and how it affects their competitor who they have been accused of impersonating from an ethical and legal standpoint: @NandosZimbabwe

For those needing to know what this ad means, it was an idea to allude to their pieces of chicken (and their aptly named proportions) as being those likened to a known area of Harare called The Avenues which constitutes the largest number of sex workers in the city. Yikes...

Disclaimer: in no way do I endorse the occupation but I will not judge anyone who buys or sells it in its various forms (strippers, stocko, etc.). But having stayed in that area before, I can tell you it’s rough in those streets! I hope this has brought you up to speed!

In the words of @neilpatel: “Good marketers copy, great marketers STEAL.” Many people see this as unethical, which it may be but that would be completely subjective to one’s perception of what’s morally acceptable to them. Factually, what they did is in no way illegal.

People deem what Mambo’s did as copying but they actually “stole,” which was actually to their advantage. They ran with an idea and tailored it to them, because that’s what works for the audience who they are in direct competition for, Nando’s audience to be precise.

Copying that would have had legal ramifications would be if they used the exact font, logo or the exact same statements Nando’s use and passing them off as their own. Nando’s uses quirky and catchy statements subtly, Mambo’s is anything but!

(I'm hoping we're still together)

The only way for Mambo’s to get a blow to their brand is if the sex workers they insinuated were part of a formally organized structure with rights and benefits, which they are not. It could even be debated that they might see this as indirectly marketing for them too! Yikes...

Nando’s suing these guys will not only be expensive for both parties to engage in a lawsuit, but it probably would be futile and a waste of time. One may go as far as to say that Nando’s NEEDED a worthy adversary in gimmicky marketing (if you have "beef" with them, get it? Lol)

Not too sure if Nando’s would want to pick a fight with them or feel flattered that their competition is following in their footsteps like a son would to their father. They haven't said anything thus far, possibly because it really is none of their business...

Mambo’s is not trying to sell chicken on their social media but generate as many leads to purchases instead. That’s essentially the use of social media; people forget socials are not e-commerce sites. Also, they aren't the only ones doing it either, @eatnlick what's good?! Hehe

Being “social” means you get your audience talking, whether it’s directly to you or with each other. What they aimed for was to go viral and they got it, even if it was divisive. Like it or not, someone decided to go try out their chicken out of impression or curiosity! Facts.

The thing marketers worldwide are afraid to admit to is that they never know what will stick. It’s always a trial and error, with refinement as you go along. If you look at previous Mambo’s ads, they weren’t like the aforementioned in style. Also, they use satire in vernac.

On the more technical side, Nando’s have their own themed font that was first hand-painted by artist and sign writer, Marks Salimu (any relation @k4rldrogo? lol). It was then digitized for commercial use by a designer called Jan Erasmus in 1999.

For those curious, he’s also the guy who was commissioned to do the font for the 2010 World cup called Menyaka. Also to note is that it’s just ONE of the fonts Nando’s uses. They also use DIN Next as their secondary font, which is used on all Southern African road signs.

So in terms of stealing the Nando’s font per se, Mambo’s cannot be charged for that. I’m not sure which font they used (I tried to look, but time) but it should be one for public use, if they didn’t need to first buy the rights to use it. Admittedly, it's similar to Nando’s.

Something you might also find interesting (in my opinion) is how even the name Mambo’s is similar in syllable and sound to the word Nando’s. I’m not sure if that was intentional but if they claim it was, that’s sheer genius!

Hate them or love them, Mambo’s lived rent-free in your mind (albeit briefly, if you saw the ad prior to this thread) through that ad and my bet is that’s exactly what they wanted; to be divisive enough to catch attention or get people talking, hopefully enough to open wallets.

Whether or not their campaign has positively contributed to their bottom-line, is something only time and the accountant's books will tell.

That said, happy #MotivationMonday and #MoneyMonday by @shamisomm

END OF THREAD.