Ba Da Bing Ba Da Boom
It’s no surprise that Steve Ballmer announced Microsoft’s new search engine at the D7 Conference, this morning. Nor is the name shocking: Bing. The Q: Would you rather Bing than Google or Yahoo?
Microsoft’s Bing marketing approach looks good, applying some of the David thinking—Google being Goliath—that I blogged about two days ago. I’m more cautious about the substance behind Bing search. Since I expect there to be so much discussion about the Bing name, I’ll start there.
Connotations are hugely important in branding. Bing makes me immediately think of the mafia. In HBO series “The Sopranos,” the main characters hang out at topless bar “Ba Da Bing.” The phrase “Ba Da Bing Ba Da Boom” is part of the cultural lexicon, meaning an easy hit (“Bang, you’re dead”) or something easily done.
The latter connotation could actually work for Microsoft. I would love to see a series of commercials showing people finding stuff easily, and so happy they motion with thumbs raised and index fingers pointed at the screen while saying, “Ba Da Bing Ba Da Boom.”
Good branding is about controlling words, preferably a single word, to marketing advantage. The word could be the brand or another with positive connotations. In a November 2008 Advertising Age article, Al Ries explains how the Barack Obama campaign came to own “change.” He writes:
Look at what ‘driving’ has done for BMW. Are there vehicles that are more fun to drive than BMWs? Probably, but it doesn’t matter. BMW has pre-empted the ‘driving’ position in the mind. The sad fact is that there are only a few dozen brands that own a word in the mind and most of them don’t even use their words as slogans. Mercedes-Benz owns ‘prestige,’ but doesn’t use the word as a slogan. Toyota owns ‘reliability,’ but doesn’t use the word as a slogan.
Microsoft could own Bing and even phrase “Ba Da Bing Ba Da Boom.” But the company is wisely looking to own something else, and this is where I shift to the marketing discussion. In a brilliant demonstration of David thinking, Microsoft describes Bing as the “decision engine”—not search engine. Hot damn! I love it. That’s applied David thinking. Microsoft is changing the rules by describing search on terms that don’t favor Google. The connotations behind “decision engine” are outstandingly good. Microsoft can own those two words through good marketing.
I like the Bing logo. It’s very trendy—Web 3.0. But behind the logo and marketing, Bing the product looks pretty much the same as Windows Live Search, at least seen from Microsoft screenshots. Bing will roll out in phases through June 3. It’s not available for me to test yet, so I can’t decisively say how different.
The screenshots raise the Q: What is Bing? Better: What isn’t Bing? Unfortunately, answer to the latter may be disappointing. The Bing search pitch is same as the last Windows Live Search update, or 2.0, released in September 2007. Microsoft touted the more natural language search capabilities and around the same core task areas as Bing: local business, health, shopping and travel. So, I’m wondering: What’s really different?
Microsoft’s introductory “Why Bing?” video gives me hope that, yes, just maybe, there really is a lot of David thinking behind the “decision engine.” Google’s approach to page ranks and keywords, for example, favors its business model. Applying David thinking, Microsoft would change the rules about how people search. Some of that is going on here. Some of the potentially differentiating features:
- Searchers can ask real questions
- Search is organized into four overreaching task areas (e.g., shopping)
- Bing organizes results into “logical categories,” like locations and coupons
- Results are presented to people get answers rather than show them keywords
Many of these concepts already apply to Windows Live Search, although their presentation appears to be better in Bing (based on my review of screenshots and demo videos; I’ll make a full evaluation when the service is live). The user interface is really pleasing, by the way. Eye candy matters—just ask anyone carrying around an Apple laptop. Google search is plain. Why shouldn’t Bing be pretty?
Even if Bing turns out to be nothing more than a slightly warmed over Windows Live Search, Microsoft still has got something big here. Marketing is the reason. The new brand, today’s press hype and the estimated $80-$100 million Microsoft plans on advertising Bing are Bling. Bing Bling.
So far, I like the early marketing. Couple choice phrases from the Bing intro video: ”Bing helps you overcome search overload and find the best choice faster” and “The world doesn’t need just another search engine, it needs a decision engine.”
Did you hear that Google?
Do you have a search story that you’d like told? Please email Joe Wilcox: oddlytogether at gmail dot com.
I assume they’re hoping that “bing” will become a verb as google has. Is the past tense of that verb “binged” or “bung”?
Larry, the past tense, or perhaps past future tense, should be “bung” as in “bungled” should Bing flop. Bung is only choice anyway. Binged is past tense of binge.
Joe, too funny! Pressing further ….
Microsoft has been spending money on search like a drunk on a binge since MSN Search first launched in the fall of 1998. Can “Bing” staunch Google’s growing search dominance, something neither MSN Search nor successor Live Search could accomplish, or will “Bing” bungle, leaving Microsoft with yet another search hangover?
I got it!
“The Bing Bundle of Dung Bungle”