Such a thing as a free breakfast

2012-01-20 09:36

There is an incontrovertible link between a company’s charitable or environmental endeavours and its marketing. While I do believe that there are companies out there that quietly do good simply because someone in charge believes it’s their responsibility, a far more relevant motivator is public perception.

Most of us would prefer to do business with companies that do good. If we’re spending our hard-earned cash, we’d like it to go somewhere that doesn’t compromise us with shoddy ethics.

At the same time, for us to know about our preferred companies’ products or services, we have to be advertised to. It has been proven, time and again, that advertising is a necessary evil – even for well-known, apparently ubiquitous brands like Coca-Cola.

To people outside of the industry, the amount of money that a company spends on marketing itself can seem insane. When I was working as an IT journalist and was sent on five-star, first-class press junkets to the United States, some friends couldn’t believe that companies would take a gamble on a couple of pages of coverage for such great expense.

When I pointed out that it was still less than the costs of paying for advertising on those pages, the friends remained suspect about some kind of dodgy mathematics governing the whole deal.

So, it’s always worth remembering that while there may be some overlap, most companies run their corporate social investment (CSI) budget out of a completely different department to their marketing one. Both have to exist, both spend lots of money, each has its own purpose.

So, when Wimpy advertised a free, no-strings-attached bacon breakfast to anyone coming to sit down between eight and nine in the morning yesterday, lots of people leapt at the notion. In the current rather bleak economic climate (who knows why the JSE is doing so well), free anything is not to be sniffed at.

But there was a hardened group of naysayers who said that it was tasteless to give away something that some people so desperately need - food - to people not desperately in need of it. And the funny thing is that although I understand the marketing/CSI distinction, I’ve had a flutter of the same disquieting response to the promotion.

On the face of it, why shouldn’t Wimpy give away food to its customers or potential customers? It’s great marketing. To say that they shouldn’t is like saying that no shop should run three-for-the-price-of-two specials - they should just give the third item to charity.

For some reason, this kind of special is more palatable to us because we feel that we’ve had to work for the reward. We’ve spent the money, we’re getting a little something extra. So why are we then suspicious or even critical when something’s completely free? In the final analysis, the money’s coming out of the same place - the company’s bottom line.

Perhaps we were also wary of what kind of a bun fight the Wimpy special might bring on. If bands of homeless people were made aware of it, would they be turned away? Would they be allowed to walk through “ROAR” shopping centres to claim their free food?

By all reports, there were queues and Wimpy restaurants around the country were full to capacity, but it was a successful and pleasant initiative for everyone involved. I’ve also heard reports of Wimpy staff telling the local car guards to come and get their gratis grub, which made some of the critical fluttering go away.

Without knowing stats or figures or having heard any official report back, I would say that the free breakfast was a success for Wimpy, and that public perception of the brand was enhanced.

Now, if someone in their CSI department were really clever, they would take the same amount spent on advertising and stocking the breakfast special and donate it to a worthy hunger-alleviation programme, so that no one is left with a bitter taste in their mouths. Oh, and because it’s a good thing to do.

- Georgina Guedes is a freelance writer. You can follow @georginaguedes on Twitter.

Send your comments to Georgina

Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.

  • Carel - 2012-01-20 10:41

    Well written article GEORGINA. Big up!

  • MoAfrika - 2012-01-20 10:48

    And your point is???

  • Twolips - 2012-01-20 10:50

    Thumbs up for the article and thumbs up for Wimpy. Knowing my Wimpy manager I'm sure he'll do something good for the community as he's very involved.

  • ellen.h.matendana - 2012-01-20 11:19

    Thumbs up to Wimpy was at Heathway for the breakfast

  • Jean-Paul - 2012-01-24 03:34

    Very good marketing as a non wimpy consumer if I'm ever on the long road and their is a choice between Wimpy and another fast food co i will buy Wimpy. So Wimpy as a non consumer how would you target me I see Wimpy = unhealthy if i walk pass you always advertising unhealthy food, try putting up a something healthy promo and you will get a new consumer.

  • Rory - 2012-01-24 08:28

    Good article Georgina, I see what you are saying that Corporate Responsibility programs should be focused more on the responsibility side as opposed to the corporate side. I look at my company, we're a pretty socially and environmentally friendly company, but for every initiative there is is a PR and marketing campaign to back it up. Whether internally or externally, and one always questions what the actual motivation behind being responsible is. But I guess it is a win win if you look at it, at least the companies are being responsible, so let them have their moment of glory. In the case of Wimpy though, great PR, great branding exercise, but no social responsibility....Nail on the head there.

  • Rapoo Tumisang - 2012-01-24 17:57

    well written article but I honestly think the CSI's main focus was to market Wimpy. Who knows if they not giving back to the community or not? and if they were to give the homeless food instead of giving it to people who do not need it and still put it out there (in the media), i think it would be bad publicity. if you going to do good, then you don't have to broadcast it. The main reason for that ad was to promote themselves, which they did a very good job...

  • pages:
  • 1