Protect your assets

Greetings once again. It is great to see you back. And great to be back.

And if you were one of those wondering if Cicero was losing his mojo, last week’s blast of enlightenment and wisdom will have convinced you that no mojo has been lost.

Could someone please enlighten this old man and explain exactly what mojo is. How can you expect Cicero not to lose his mojo when he has no idea what mojo is? This is a bit like Donald Rumsfeld, the former American Secretary for Defence, or Defense as they ignorantly spell it, and his ‘unknown unknowns’ although perhaps for Cicero this is a ‘known unknown’. Whatever.

In past few days those very clever chaps at MORI have published some interesting research findings. Every few days it seems that someone or other has undertaken some research among one group or another with their findings eventually hitting the airwaves and confirming the axiom that there are lies, damned lines and statistics.

And of course we should never forget that 81.3% of statistics are made up on the spot.

But back to MORI, surely they would not put their name against numbers that were made up. Or would they?

Anyway MORI have recently spoken with 187 senior board directors of the UK’s leading companies and found out that “94% agree that the asset which offers the greatest protection during an economic downturn is a strong brand”.

Of course this will not come as great news to you but there are people out there in senior positions who do not act or speak like they agree with this statement, the most notable of whom are the Bean Counters in many of our businesses.

So why is your brand your most important asset in a recession? Three reasons immediately spring to this aged and wise mind.

Firstly there is consumer confidence. Loyal customers retain confidence in a strong brand even when the going gets tough and confident customers are less likely to switch brand. Secondly in tough economic times potential customers, staff and shareholders are more risk averse. A strong brand mitigates this risk in the mind of the stakeholder, providing an anchor of certainty and surety when all about them is turmoil and uncertain. And lastly company value is more likely to remain buoyant in an economic downturn when it is supported by a strong and profitable brand.

And if you want more support for this argument, the Profit Impact of Market Strategy (PIMS for short) database has since the mid 1960s with great rigour and credibility been tracking data to identify the relationship between business action and business outcomes and they too have reached the conclusion that those enlightened and far sighted businesses which stand up to the penny pinching Bean Counters and continue to invest in their brand assets, have in the medium term added greater value than those businesses where parsimony prevails.

But surely this information perfect sense. And surely too it is important that said Head Honchos continue to invest in this asset. After all you would not invest in a spanking new factory and neglect to maintain it, would you?

So don’t be tempted to stop investing in strengthening your brand, even when all around are losing their heads. By neglecting your brand, you risk exposing the business at a time when recovery is much more costly and much less certain of success. Brand profitability is the ultimate goal but it takes investment. Short term budget cuts may lead to immediate relief of pressure, but they will surely lead to long term heartache. Stand up to the Bean Counters. And protect your asset. If you don’t, who else will?

Is it only me.............but I think I have been incredibly stupid.

I have had an epiphany moment of such great impact that I have suddenly realised that I might not be as clever as I thought I was. Wow! No doubt that has left you reeling.

As you will know the 1832 Great Reform Act did away with rotten boroughs, bribery at the polls and all sort of electoral corruption. Now in the spirit of Emil Zola j’accuse governments of all persuasions, and most notably the Last Lot, of acting in breach of the Great Reform Act, the foundation stone of our democratic system.

Stay with me on this one.

If you look at the map showing the distribution of our money masquerading as government largesse, you will be struck, as I was, with the extent to which government generosity is concentrated in pockets dotted around the country. In some towns, cities, regions and nations, the share of GDP you can put down to our money is greater than 50%. And when you get to this level of concentration there is such a hugely critical mass of vested interest that change is impossible. Is this not exactly the same conditions that the 1832 Act was designed to prevent? If it wasn’t, could you please explain the difference to me.

And my solution to this cancer at the heart of our democratic system? Simple. Deny the vote to all those dependent on government largesse and let only those without a vested interest, who are not in receipt of patronage, or who remain un-bribed, have the vote. In this way we can return to the ideals of the Great Reformers and to ensure that all those who died on the massacre fields at Peterloo or who were banished overseas, did not sacrifice themselves in vain.

Of course this would mean that the Apparatchiks would be denied the vote but this makes perfect sense. They work for the government of the day and are supposedly neutral and apolitical. Having a vote clearly makes this a nonsense so it is just that those on the payroll, those with their snouts in the trough so to speak, be removed from the political system. We do not want the politics of the pork barrel over here, methinks.

Anyone else think I have been incredibly thick?

Have a great week.

Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.