Monday, October 19, 2009

The world is coming to and end in 2012

Interesting stuff this. I love the Doomsday genre of fiction, and of course we know that there is a large Doomsday genre in advertising and promotions as well. Witness Orson Welles' famous promo for his radio series on "The War of the Worlds" - some 60 years later, this is still talked of as one of the greatest promos ever.

Till now, that is. There's this whole paranoia doing the rounds about how the world is going to end in 2012, when the planet Nibiru crashes into the Earth, and the world shall end, not with a whimper but with a bang.

My friend Ashok Dey has compiled a whole bunch of material on this. And here they are. The sources are Astrobiology (a NASA website), and the Los Angeles Times.

There's no truth in the so-called 'prediction', and while one loves the success of the promos, the paranoia needs to be rubbished.

Nibiru and Doomsday 2012: Questions and Answers

Stories about the fictional planet Nibiru and predictions of doomsday in December 2012 have blossomed on the Internet. There are now (June 2009) more than 175 books listed on Amazon.com dealing with the 2012 doomsday. As this hoax spreads, many more disaster scenarios are being suggested. “Ask an Astrobiologist” has received nearly a thousand questions about Nibiru and 2012, with more than 200 answers posted. Many new questions are similar to those already answered. Following is a list of the most popular “Twenty Questions” organized in a logical succession and answered in some detail.

In addition to my responses, there are some other good resources

Neil de Grassse Tyson posted a nice video clip on the Nibiru-2012 issue.

Wikipedia has several useful entries. Start with Nibiru Collision, then look at Nibiru Mythology and Nibiru Sitchin). Also informative is the entry for 2012 doomsday predictions.

For a detailed description of the origin of the Planet X / Nibiru cult see the discussion by Phil Plait on his Badastronomy website.

David Morrison,
NAI Senior Scientist
June 1, 2009

1. What is the origin of the prediction that the world will end in December 2012?
The story started with claims that Nibiru, a supposed planet discovered by the Sumerians, is headed toward Earth. Zecharia Sitchin, who writes fiction about the ancient Mesopotamian civilization of Sumer, claimed in several books (e.g., The Twelfth Planet, published in 1976) that he has found and translated Sumerian documents that identify the planet Nibiru, orbiting the Sun every 3600 years. These Sumerian fables include stories of “ancient astronauts” visiting Earth from a civilization of aliens called the Anunnaki. Then Nancy Lieder, a self-declared psychic who claims she is channeling aliens, wrote on her website Zetatalk that the inhabitants of a fictional planet around the star Zeta Reticuli warned her that the Earth was in danger from Planet X or Nibiru. This catastrophe was initially predicted for May 2003, but when nothing happened the doomsday date was moved forward to December 2012. Only recently have these two fables been linked to the end of the Mayan long-count at the winter solstice in 2012 – hence the predicted doomsday date of December 21, 2012.

2. The Sumerians were the first great civilization, and they made many accurate astronomical predictions, including the existence of the planets Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. So why should we not believe their predictions about Nibiru?
Nibiru is a name in Babylonian astrology sometimes associated with the god Marduk. Nibiru appears as a minor character in the Babylonian creation poem Enuma Elish as recorded in the library of Assurbanipal, King of Assyria (668-627 BCE). Sumer flourished much earlier, from about the 23rd century to the 17th century BCE. The claims that Nibiru is a planet and was known to the Sumerians are contradicted by scholars who (unlike Zecharia Sitchin) study and translate the written records of ancient Mesopotamia. Sumer was indeed a great civilization, important for the development of agriculture, water management, urban life, and especially writing. However, they left very few records dealing with astronomy. Certainly they did not know about the existence of Uranus, Neptune or Pluto. They also had no understanding that the planets orbited the Sun, an idea that first developed in ancient Greece two millennia after the end of Sumer. Claims that Sumerians had a sophisticated astronomy, or that they even had a god named Nibiru, are the product of Sitchin’s imagination.

3. How can you deny the existence of Nibiru when IRAS discovered it in 1983 and the story appeared in leading newspapers? At that time you called it Planet X, and later it was named Xena or Eris.
IRAS (the NASA Infrared Astronomy Satellite, which carried out a sky survey for 10 months in 1983) discovered many infrared sources, but none of them was Nibiru or Planet X or any other objects in the outer solar system. There is a good discussion from Caltech to be found at (spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/tchester/iras/no_tenth_planet_yet.html). Briefly, IRAS cataloged 350,000 infrared sources, and initially many of these sources were unidentified (which was the point, of course, of making such a survey). All of these observations have been followed up by subsequent studies with more powerful instruments both on the ground and in space. The rumor about a “tenth planet” erupted in 1984 after a scientific paper was published in Astrophysical Journal Letters titled “Unidentified point sources in the IRAS minisurvey”, which discussed several infrared sources with “no counterparts”. But these “mystery objects” were subsequently found to be distant galaxies (except one, which was a wisp of “infrared cirrus”), as published in 1987. No IRAS source has ever turned out to be a planet. A good discussion of this whole issue is to be found on Phil Plait’s website (www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/science.html#iras). The bottom line is that Nibiru is a myth, with no basis in fact. To an astronomer, persistent claims about a planet that is “nearby” but “invisible” are just plain silly.

4. Maybe we should be asking about Planet X or Eris, not Nibiru. Why does keep secret the orbit of Eris?
“Planet X” is an oxymoron when applied to a real object. The term has been used by astronomers over the past century for a possible or suspected object. Once the object is found, it is given a real name, as was done with Pluto and Eris, both of which were at some time referred to as Planet X. If a new object turns out to be not real, or not a planet, then you won’t hear about it again. If it is real, it is not called Planet X.

Eris is one of several dwarf planets recently found by astronomers in the outer solar system, all of them on normal orbits that will never bring them near Earth. Like Pluto, Eris is smaller than our Moon. It is very far away, and its orbit never brings it closer than about 4 billion miles. There is no secret about Eris and its orbit, as you can easily verify by googling it or looking it up in Wikipedia.

5. Do you deny that built a South Pole Telescope () to track Nibiru? Why else would they build a telescope at the South Pole?
There is a telescope at the South Pole, but it was not built by NASA and not used to study Nibiru. The South Pole Telescope was supported by the National Science Foundation, and it is a radio telescope, not an optical instrument. It cannot take images or photos. You can look it up on Wikipedia. The Antarctic is a great place for astronomical infrared and short-wave-radio observations, and it also has the advantage that objects can be observed continuously without the interference of the day-night cycle.

I should add that it is impossible to imagine a geometry in which an object can be seen only from the South Pole. Even if it were due south of the Earth, it could be seen from the entire southern hemisphere.

6. There are many photos and videos of Nibiru on the Internet. Isn’t that proof that it exists?
The great majority of the photos and videos on the Internet are of some feature near the Sun (apparently supporting the claim that Nibiru has been hiding behind the Sun for the past several years.) These are actually false images of the Sun caused by internal reflections in the lens, often called lens flare. You can identify them easily by the fact that they appear diametrically opposite the real solar image, as if reflected across the center of the image. This is especially obvious in videos, where as the camera moves, the false image dances about always exactly opposite the real image. Similar lens flare is a source of many UFO photos taken at night with strong light sources such as streetlights in the frame. I am surprised that people don’t recognize this common photo artifact. I am also amazed that these photos showing something nearly as large and bright as the Sun (a “second sun”) are accepted together with claims made on some of the same websites that Nibiru is too faint to be seen or photographed except with large telescopes.

One widely reported telescopic photo (www.greatdreams.com/nibiru-possible.jpg) shows two views of an expanding gas cloud far beyond the solar system, which is not moving; you can see this from the fact that the stars are the same in both pictures. A sharp-eyed reader of this website identified these photos as a gas shell around the star V838 Mon. Wikipedia has a nice write-up and a beautiful photo of it from Hubble. Another high school student was initially impressed by posted images of a red blob that were said to be of Nibiru. Then he worked out in his Photoshop class how to make just such pictures starting from scratch.

One video posted in summer 2008 on Youtube (www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDKtkWIx00A) shows a guy standing in his kitchen claiming that one of the objects discovered by a NASA x-ray telescope is Nibiru. What is his evidence? That since this false-color x-ray image released by NASA is blue, this must really be a nearby planet with an ocean. This would be hilarious if it were not used to frighten people.

7. Can you explain the fact that the area at (5h 53m 27s, -6 10’ 58”) has been blackened out in Google Sky and Microsoft Telescope? People suggest that these have been blackened out because those are the co-ordinates where Nibiru is located at present.
Several people have asked me about this blank rectangle in Orion in Google Sky, which is a presentation of images from the Sloan Digital Survey. This can’t be a “hiding place” for Nibiru, since it is a part of the sky that could be seen from almost everywhere on the Earth in the winter of 2007-08 when much of the talk about Nibiru began. That would contradict the claims that Nibiru was hiding behind the Sun or that it could be seen only from the southern hemisphere. But I too was curious about this blank rectangle, so I asked a friend who is a senior scientist at Google. He replied that he “found out that the missing data is due to a processing error in the image stitching program we use to display the Sloan survey images. The team assures me that in the next run through, this will be fixed!”

8. If the government knew about Nibiru, wouldn’t they keep it a secret to avoid panic? Isn’t it the government’s job to keep the population at ease?
There are many objectives of government, but they do not include keeping the population at ease. My experience is that sometimes parts of the government do just the opposite, as in the frequent references to various terrorist threats or warnings about driving accidents on long holiday weekends, which are no more dangerous than any other time. There is a long history of associating bad things with political opponents (older readers will remember the “missile gap” in the 1960 election, younger ones will note the many current references to who is or is not keeping the U.S. safe from terrorists). Further, social scientists have pointed out that many of our concepts of public panic are the product of Hollywood, while in the real world people have a good record of helping each other in a time of danger. I think everyone also recognizes that keeping bad news secret usually backfires, making the issue even worse when the facts finally come out. And in the case of Nibiru, these facts would come out very soon indeed.

Even if they wanted to, the government could not keep Nibiru a secret. If it were real, it would be tracked by thousands of astronomers, amateurs as well a professional. These astronomers are spread all over the world. I know the astronomy community, and these scientists would not keep a secret even if ordered to. You just can’t hide a planet on its way to the inner solar system!

9. Why does the Mayan calendar say the world will end in 2012? I have heard that they have been pretty accurate in the past with other planetary predictions. How can you be sure you know more than they
did?
Calendars exist for keeping track of the passage of time, not for predicting the future. The Mayan astronomers were clever, and they developed a very complex calendar. Ancient calendars are interesting to historians, but of they cannot match the ability we have today to keep track of time, or the precision of the calendars currently in use. The main point, however, is that calendars, whether contemporary or ancient, cannot predict the future of our planet or warn of things to happen on a specific date such as 2012.

I note that my desk calendar ends much sooner, on December 31 2009, but I do not interpret this as a prediction of Armageddon. It is just the beginning of a new year.

10. What is the polar shift theory? Is it true that the earth’s crust does a 180-degree rotation around the core in a matter of days if not hours? Does this have something to do to do with our solar system dipping beneath the galactic equator?
A reversal in the rotation of Earth is impossible. It has never happened and never will. There are slow movements of the continents (for example Antarctica was near the equator hundreds of millions of years ago), but that is irrelevant to claims of reversal of the rotational poles. However, many of the disaster websites pull a bait-and-shift to fool people. They claim a relationship between the rotation and the magnetic polarity of Earth, which does change irregularly with a magnetic reversal taking place every 400,000 years on average. As far as we know, such a magnetic reversal doesn’t cause any harm to life on Earth. A magnetic reversal is very unlikely to happen in the next few millennia, anyway. But they falsely claim that a magnetic reversal is coming soon (in 2012) and that this is the same as, or will trigger, a reversal of rotational poles. The bottom line is: (a) Rotation direction and magnetic polarity are not related. (b) There is no reason to expect a reversal of magnetic polarity any time soon, or to anticipate any bad effects on life when it does eventually happen. © A sudden shift in rotational pole with disastrous consequences is impossible. Also, none of this has anything to do with the galactic equator or any of the other nonsense about alignments that appears on many of the conspiracy theory websites.

11. When most of the planets align in 2012 and planet Earth is in the center of the Milky Way, what will the effects of this be on planet Earth? Could it cause a pole shift, and if so what could we
expect?
There is no planet alignment in 2012 or any other time in the next several decades. As to the Earth being in the center of the Milky Way, I don’t know what this phrase means. If you are referring to the Milky Way Galaxy, we are rather far toward the edge of this spiral galaxy, some 30,000 light years from the center. We circle the galactic center in a period of 225-250 million years, always keeping approximately the same distance. Concerning a pole shift, I also don’t know what this means. If it means some sudden change in the position of the pole (that is, the rotation axis of the Earth), then that is impossible, as noted in the answer to Question 10. What many websites do discuss is the alignment of the Earth and Sun with the center of the Milky Way in the constellation of Sagittarius. This happens every December, with no bad consequences, and there is no reason to expect 2012 to be different from any other year.

12. When the sun and the Earth line up on the galactic plane at the same time with the black hole being in the center couldn’t that cause something to happen, due to the fact that the black hole has such a strong gravitational pull.
There is a giant black hole in the center of our Milky Way galaxy, and like any concentration of mass it exerts gravitational force on the rest of the Galaxy. However, the galactic center is very far away, approximately 30,000 light years, so it has negligible effects on the solar system or the Earth. There are no special forces from the galactic plane or the galactic center. The only important force that acts on the Earth is the gravitation of the Sun and Moon. As far as the influence of the galactic plane, there is nothing special about this location. The last time the Earth was in the galactic plane was several million years ago. Claims that we are about to cross the galactic plane are untrue.

13. I am scared about the fact that the Earth will enter the Dark Rift in the Milky Way. What will this do? Will the Earth be swa
llowed up?
The “dark rift” is a popular name for the broad and diffuse dust clouds in the inner arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, which block our view of the galactic center. The entire “galactic alignment” scare is pretty crazy. Late in December the Sun is always approximately in the direction of the center of the Galaxy as seen from the Earth, but so what? Apparently the con-men who are trying to scare you have decided to use these meaningless phrases about “alignments” and the “dark rift” and “photon belt” precisely because they are not understood by the public. It is too bad, but there is no law against lying on the Internet or anywhere else except in a court of law. As far as the safety of the Earth is concerned, the important threats are from global warming and loss of biological diversity, and perhaps someday from collision with an asteroid or comet, not the pseudoscientific claims about 2012.

14. I have heard that the Earth’s magnetic field will flip in 2012 just when the strongest level of solar storms in history is predicted to take place. Will this kill us or destroy our civilization?
Near solar maximum (which happens every 11 years approximately), there are many more solar flares and coronal mass ejections than near solar minimum. Flares and mass ejections are no danger for humans or other life on Earth. They could endanger astronauts in deep space or on the Moon, and this is something that NASA must learn to deal with, but it is not a problem for you or me. Large outbursts can interrupt radio transmission, cause bright displays of the aurora (Northern and Southern Lights), and damage the electronics of some satellites in space. Today many satellites are designed to deal with this possibility, for example by switching off some of their more delicate circuits and going into a “safe” mode for a few hours. In extreme cases solar activity can also disrupt electrical transmissions on the ground, possibly leading to electrical blackouts, but this is rare.

The last solar maximum occurred in 2001, so the next one was predicted for around 2012, 11 years later. However, the most recent solar minimum was unusual, with a period of a couple of years with almost no sunspots or other indications of solar activity, so scientists now guess that the next maximum will be delayed, perhaps to 2013. However, the details of the solar cycle remain basically unpredictable.

You are correct that the Earth’s magnetic field protects us by creating a large region in space, called the Earth’s magnetosphere, within which most of the material ejected from the Sun is captured or deflected, but there is no reason to expect a reversal of magnetic polarity any time soon. These magnetic reversals happen only once in 400,000 years on average.

15. I am confused about a report on the Fox News website that in 2012 a “Powerful Solar Storm Could Shut Down U.S. for Months”. They referred to a report from the National Academy of Sciences that was commissioned and paid for by . If nothing is going to happen as a result of the event in 2012, why would allow such nonsense to be reported?
NASA is pleased with the National Research Council report on heliophysics. As you note, this report includes a worst-case analysis of what could happen today if there were a repetition of the biggest solar storm ever recorded (in 1859). The problem is the way such information can be used out of context. There is no reason to expect such a large solar storm in the near future, certainly not in 2012 specifically. Your reference to “the event in 2012” illustrates this problem. There is no prediction of an “event in 2012”. We don’t even know if the next solar maximum will take place in that year. The whole 2012 disaster scenario is a hoax, fueled by ads for the Hollywood science-fiction disaster film “2012”. I can only hope that most people are able to distinguish Hollywood film plots from reality.

16. All my school friends are telling me that we are all going to die in the year 2012 due to a meteor hitting earth
. Is this true?
Your friends are wrong. The Earth has always been subject to impacts by comets and asteroids, although big hits are very rare. The last big impact was 65 million years ago, and that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. Today NASA astronomers are carrying out a survey called the Spaceguard Survey to find any large near-Earth asteroids long before they hit. We have already determined that there are no threatening asteroids as large as the one that killed the dinosaurs. All this work is done openly with the discoveries posted every day on the NASA NEO Program Office website (neo.jpl.nasa.gov), so you can see for yourself that nothing is predicted to hit in 2012.

17. If Nibiru is a hoax, why doesn’t issue a denial? How can you permit these stores to circulate and frighten people? Why doesn’t the U.S. government do something about it!
If you go to the NASA home page, nasa.gov, you will see many stories that expose the Nibiru-2012 hoax. Try searching nasa.com under “Nibiru” or “2012”. There is not much more that NASA can do. These hoaxes have nothing to do with NASA and are not based on NASA data, so we as an agency are not directly involved. But scientists, both within NASA and outside, recognize that this hoax with its effort to frighten people is a distraction from more important science concerns, such as global warming and loss of biological diversity. We live in a country where there is freedom of speech, and that includes freedom to lie. You should be glad there are no censors. But if you will just use common sense I am sure you can recognize the lies. As we approach 2012, the lies will be come even more obvious.

18. Can you prove to me that Nibiru is a hoax? There are so many reports that something terrible will happen in 2012. I need proof because the government and are keeping
so much from us.
It is not logical to ask for proof that the 2012 doomsday is a hoax. Your questions should be to the doomsday advocates to prove that what they are saying is true, not to NASA to prove it is false. If someone claimed on the Internet that there were 50-foot tall purple elephants walking through Cleveland, would anyone expect NASA to prove this wrong? The burden of proof falls on those who make wild claims. Remember the often-quoted comment from Carl Sagan that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary levels of evidence if they are to be believed.

However, I think that astronomers have reached the point where we can offer extremely strong arguments that Nibiru does not exist. A large planet (or a brown dwarf) in our solar system would have been known to astronomers for many years, both indirectly from its gravitational perturbations on other objects and by direct detection in the infrared. The NASA Infrared Astronomy Satellite (IRAS) carried out the first all-sky survey in 1983, and several subsequent surveys would also have seen Nibiru if it were there. Further, if a large mass passed through the inner solar system every 3600 years, we would see its disruptive effects on the orbits of the inner planets, and we don’t.

You don’t need to take my word for it. Just use common sense. Have you seen Nibiru? In 2008 many websites said it would be visible to the naked eye in spring 2009. If a large planet or brown dwarf were headed for the inner solar system in 2012, it would already be tracked by hundreds of thousands of astronomers, professional and amateur, all over the world. Do you know any amateur astronomers who are watching it? Have you seen any photos or discussion of it in the big popular astronomy magazines like Sky & Telescope? Just think about it. No one could hide Nibiru if it existed.

19. What about the scary ads for the new film 2012? They tell us to look at these Internet sites to verify the doomsday threat.
The pseudoscientific claims about Nibiru and a doomsday in 2012, together with distrust of the government, are being amplified by publicity for the new film from Columbia Pictures titled 2012, to be released in November 2009. The film’s trailer, appearing in theaters and on their website , shows a tidal wave breaking over the Himalayas, with only the following words: “How would the governments of our planet prepare 6 billion people for the end of the world? [long pause] They wouldn’t. [long pause] Find out the Truth. Google search 2012”.

The film publicity includes creation of a faux scientific website (www.instituteforhumancontinuity.org/) for “The Institute for Human Continuity”, which is entirely fictitious. According to this website, the IHC is dedicated to scientific research and public preparedness. Its mission is the survival of mankind. The website explains that the Institute was founded 1978 by international leaders of government, business, and science. They say that in 2004, IHC scientists confirmed with 94% certainty that the world would be destroyed in 2012. This website encourages people to register for a lottery to select those who will be saved; a colleague submitted the name of her cat, which was accepted. I learned from Wikipedia that creating this sort of fake website is a new advertising technique called “Viral Marketing”, by analogy with computer viruses.

20. Is it possible that the influx of questions you describe is part of some kind of campaign for a book or movie, in the hopes that the volume of denials is taken as more “evidence” that there is a conspiracy?
I ask myself the same questions every day, as the volume of mail I receive about Nibiru (along with various alignments and pole shifts) keeps increasing — now more than 20 per week. Clearly there is money to be made from people’s fear about an approaching doomsday. Some of this hype is apparently advertising for the science fiction disaster movie 2012 (see Question 19). Many websites are selling books and tapes about Nibiru or even “survival kits”. It is all very sad, that with so many real issues (such as global warming and financial collapse) people are being taken in by these lies. In the final chapter of a new astronomy book (The Hunt for Planet X) by Govert Shilling, he writes: “There is plenty to do for the debunkers – the archaeologists and astronomers who take a long and skeptical look at the tidal wave of Nibiru nonsense and explain with scientific precision what is wrong with this cosmic fairy-tale. They will have their work cut out in the next few years. And on December 22, 2012 there will be a new pseudoscientific cock-and-bull story doing the rounds and the whole circus will start all over again. Because no matter how many new celestial bodies are found in our solar system, there will always be a need for a mysterious Planet X.”

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Comment on "Crystal ball gazing 2010"

My friend has posted some thought-provoking views in his blog - http://www.promofaqs.blogspot.com/ - I would strongly recommend all to visit his blog. His remarks has inspired me to pen a few thoughts of my own.

The fundamentals for creating a brand remains immutable – differentiation and relevance. If your brand is not differentiated – the BAV talks of this as real or perceived distinctions of one brand vs its competitors – then it dies. The BAV talks of relevance as the actual and perceived importance of the brand to the consumer

If we agree with these, then the rest is a lot easier to handle. “Reason to buy” and “Value” are related, IMO actually the same – because neither is necessary logical and purely economic in the consumers’ eyes. The consumer does not necessarily buy in most categories because of a functional reason; irrational motivators get into play, and the whole combination of “reasons” provide the customer value equation in the consumer’s mind, which tilts in favour of a particular brand during the decision process.

The brand value indeed determines, and sometimes, is the differentiator. If Pepsi is the iconoclast, then that is the differentiator, which drives the advertising, and other marketing initiatives. But the important thing is to understand that Pepsi is indeed the iconoclast, not ‘youthful’, which is what I have found as the answer given by most b-school students that I have encountered. “Being youthful” is a category imperative – not a brand differentiator.

The key problems that I see in the market place today are

  • marketers are not clear about the values, differentiators of their brands
  • marketers and creative directors are not clear about how to make the differentiators relevant, in the most dramatic, memorable and sustainable way. This is essentially due to two reasons
  1. not enough work done in understanding the consumer – hence so called consumer insights are superficial at best
  2. not enough quality control in the creative ideation stage

I don’t agree with the statement “they don’t need to know you to love you.” They still do need to know you to love you, except that consumers can fall in love quickly, sometimes it can indeed be love at first sight. But, that can happen only with the right kind of stimuli – which is why creative directors and marketers are hired.

I would like to change a couple of things my friend has written – customer retention is customer care. IMO, it’s the reverse. Customer care is customer retention. And customer forums can be leveraged to spread the good word fast, really fast. On the downside, if you don’t care for your customers, the word will spread just as fast – so you got a choice to make, buddy! That’s where the community forums on the net become so important and effective.

I fully agree with Experience, Education, Engagement and Excitement – the four E’s of brand building today. I would go so far as to say that the last three E’s can be subsumed in the first – EXPERIENCE. Education, Engagement and Excitement are parameters which can define the contours in which the Experience is to be delivered.

Finally, it all boils down to – Values, Differentiation and Relevance. If you got it right, you’re on the winning path.

Things Prez Obama did not say

I got a sneak preview this morning of the document that had been given to the Prez by his ADC when he got the Nobel and he had to make a statement. Some of the sentences in the original statement were knocked off - because the Prez thought they were a bit too honest and upfront. For the edification of the world, I now present, for the first time in history, the unedited version. The stuff which was cut out is in italics. For the sake of brevity, I am not reproducing the paragraphs which didn't the Presidential blue pencil, or is red pencil?


"To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize, men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace. But if the committee thinks they can take it away from me, they got another think coming – it will be in MY trophy cabinet and in no one else’s, or is it no one’s else? I better check with my speechwriter.

"But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women and all Americans want to build, a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. Thank God for the “momentum” bit, if they’d waited for what I finally end up doing, maybe I’d never get it. Good lads and ladies, the Committee!

"And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. Now, these challenges can't be met by any one leader or any one nation. And that's why my administration's worked to establish a new era of engagement in which all nations must take responsibility for the world we seek. As long as leave the US out of this ‘responsibility’ nonsense – we’ll just take the money thank you very much!!

"We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people. And that's why we've begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons: because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions. Again, as long as we in the US get to keep what we got, we’re delighted. If anyone talks of us reducing our nuclear weapons stockpile, boy! has he got a megaton of our wrath coming his way.

"We cannot accept the growing threat posed by climate change, which could forever damage the world that we pass on to our children, sowing conflict and famine, destroying coastlines and emptying cities. And that's why all nations must now accept their share of responsibility for transforming the way that we use energy. Again, leave the US out of it – see above for repeat of sentence. Or do I have to spell things out every single time??!!

"Even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the commander in chief of a country that's responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies. I am also commander in chief of a country that’s responsible a large number of wars in the last half century – and I’ll get my PR agency to work on making people forget that.

"I'm also aware that we are dealing with the impact of a global economic crisis that has left millions of Americans looking for work. These are concerns that I confront every day on behalf of the American people. Some of the work confronting us will not be completed during my presidency. Some, like the elimination of nuclear weapons, may not be completed in my lifetime.

"But I know these challenges can be met, so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone. The whole of Wall Street is working towards a solution to the economic crisis – the solution that I favour is to make sure that all the money in the world is in Wall Street, and nobody else has any money. That way, no crisis in the US, and no crisis anywhere else either; you see, money is the root cause of all worries – so global happiness is achieved. Will they give me a second Nobel, I wonder?"


So now you know. And when you rush out and buy the Prez's memoirs, remember you read this here first.

Monday, June 29, 2009

More on Visa Go

An enterprising youngster dug this out for me a little while ago - this appeared in the DNA newspaper in Mumbai on March 19, 2009, when the Visa Go campaign was launched.

I am quoting in full from the body copy - I kid you not, God's own truth! this is the body copy and not the Powerpoint of the creative presentation the agency made when selling this piece of junk to the client. Or did the client make this Powerpoint when selling this piece of turkey to the agency and paid the latter to take the blame?

Anyway, here goes:

"It's one word, just one tiny, two-letter word that makes amazing things happen. Go turns a special moment into an unforgettable celebration. Go is what makes you want to say 'I do' in style. Go is the reason we decide to spend a lifetime together after just a week of knowing each other. Go requests the pleasure of the whole world's company to celebrate a new milestone in your life. Go loves the little rituals and the big feasts. Go looks at a honeymoon in Scotland and says 'yes'. Go lets you live your dream."

I am not sure copywriters can actually write this stuff. Maybe as an exercise in creative writing they can - and maybe that's where Visa got their copy from, a creative writing workshop for would be writers of the Great American Whatever.

There can be no other source for such overripe garbage - no agency could have written this.

Five short steps to full health

It's simple - forget running, walking, yoga, aerobics, tai chi, lifting weights, etc. Whatever you'd been doing till now to stay healthy is all wrong.

The answer is much simpler and so much more fun - all you got to do bathe five times a day with Lifebuoy, and bingo! no more bunking (never mind Fanta says that bunking is allowed), no more not being able to attend exams, or work, or telling the boss through a handkerchief placed on your phone that you've been sneezing all through the night, boss, not a wink's sleep.

All bosses have to do is to replace all their soaps in all their loos with Lifebuoy.



Hindustan Unilever has made consumers forget the difference between causality and correlation. I am not accusing HUL of bad research - but I am indeed accusing them of unethical advertising. Healthcare research requires far more stringent protocols than the kind of research that must have gone into making this ad. As the country's largest FMCG company, HUL should know better than to mislead their consumers, read mothers and housewives, into believing that the shortest way to good health for their kids is bathing with Lifebuoy 5 times a day, and ignoring other ways of keeping the kids in good shape.

Who gets paid for these? And why?

When a huge global brand employs a huge global agency to create a huge new campaign, the general tendency is to bate breath, nibble on nails, and generally await the kingdom that is to come, when all can say "hosannah, what a brilliant campaign!".

Which is I guess what many of us did when Chiat Day, LA (I think) went about launching the Visa Go campaign. When the campaign did get launched, I said, hey wait a sec! is this, is this really what you guys were working on? Really? This mother is a wimp, a WIMP!! a godawful WIMP!!

So Visa gets used for travel? So tell me something I didn't know! So more people use Visa to travel - so tell me how does that affect me! Is it faster, cheaper, better than other known forms of travel - does it get me from here to there and back again in better shape? Tell me something!, anything, which makes me believe that the communicator has something to say.

And then I saw this one



At least this had a message: your Visa debit card can do most things that cash can, so you don't need to go to a ATM to withdraw money. I don't like the ad - the leadup is too long, the mood swings from aggro to sing-a-long abruptly, and the fact that the agency knows it has a crappy idea shows in the production.

But at least it has a message, and a reason why. Of course, carpers and cavillers will complain that you try to pay your rick guy with a debit card, just try!

It IS rocket science, y'know!

If you thought that making kitchenware, refrigerators, and indeed even deodorants, was easy, you gotta think again.

When I was young, and the world was not ruled by TV, branded deos were made in USA (Ulhasnagar Sindhi Association), and refrigerators and other appliances were made by Voltas, Allwyn and others in factories, where they hammered and welded stuff together.

Now, towards the end of the first decade of the new millenium, we know better. Thanks to a recent bunch of Godrej ads, we know that
  • Godrej makes rockets (a fact they had successfully hidden from public knowledge till now)
  • it takes rocket science to make refrigerators and other appliances
And that's not all. Their new Cinthol Deo is also powered by rocket technology. Check this out - the Deo has got to be a mini rocket the way it goes about chasing Hritik - and the latter better watch his a**! And I am not going to get into the phallic symbolism of the whole shebang.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Ad properties as long term assets

My good friend, Bobby Pawar, Chief Creative Officer, DDB Mudra, wrote an article called "Planning ahead to win" - (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/planning-ahead-to-win /357628/) about the Zoozoo campaign by Vodafone.

I am quoting the whole thing below, because the lessons are salutary.

"Looks like, the marketing community has had an infestation of Zoozoos. Most ad folks are going, ‘******od, why don’t we have clients who let us do this kind of work?’ Clients are loudly wondering why their agencies can’t bring them such breakthrough ideas, maybe they need added motivation in the form of a reduction in fees.

"Meanwhile, consumers of every stripe love the zany critters, unmindful of the deep introspection going on in the hallowed halls of marketing.

"Before we go on, lemme add my spoonful of praise to the heapin’ helpful that has already doused Harit (Nagpal of Vodafone) and Rajiv (Rao of O&M). You guys deserve a toke from Jimi Hendrix’s hookah when you get to heaven. Another thing, I love and hate you in equal measure. But, hey, enough about me.

"Let’s get back to us, as in “us” who wish we had thought of, or bought, the Zoozoos campaign. Or, an idea just as big. Heck, bigger. Yup, we can’t get there from where we are. Let’s admit it, shall we? If someone had come to us asking for six months and a budget to develop brand mascots, our reply would have been two words, one starting with ‘ f’ and the other ending with ‘ it’.

"Let’s go over the statistics for the Zoozoo campaign. Six months: They started designing and crafting the characters six months ago. Most of that time, they didn’t know if they even had an idea to build on.

"The next number is three. That’s how much pre-production time Nirvana Films took to figure out how to shoot the commercials. And I have a sneaking suspicion they did not do it for free. The last figure is 30. That’s how many television spots they made. I am not going to bother to count the number of print/outdoor executions, digital activities, etc., because at our age it is best to keep the excitement to a minimum.

"Zoozoos happened because both the client and the agency planned way ahead. They kept at it, through everything. Then when they saw they had a winner they put their all behind it.

"Is that how we work everyday? We think fast is great, don’t we? Some of the creative folks we admire the most are those who think on their feet. But the quickest ad in the West is no good if it is no good.

"The creative process is a process. It takes a while for the brief to sink in and for all the obvious ideas to be flushed out of the system. It is only after that do the really interesting ideas begin to come your way and make your acquaintance.

‘Hi there stranger, my name is Zoozoo’.

"I don’t say this because that’s just good for the creative, but because it is also good business. How many business owners you know will risk Rs 10 crore, or whatever your media budget is, on a few hours of thinking? Steve Hayden, the man who wrote the commercial of the century, once told me you have to write at least twenty scripts to get a couple of good ones. He would know."

After the kind of years and hours Bobby and I have together put into the ad industry, it's really heartening, because it's so rare, to come across the kind of concerted effort that Zoozoo represents.

The most important lesson to be learnt out of this is that if you think of advertising as an investment, please plan for the investment in the same way as you would plan for investments into capital equipment, and other kinds of assets.

There's a lot of hot air that I have heard over the years about advertising being an investment expenditure, and that advertising properties are assets. Hot air, because a couple of days after such pronouncements, the client and the ad agency go back to the "fast is great" mode; forget about quality, and who's to judge anyway? We'll change the campaign six months later.

Let's go through the way the thinking might have gone. I must add that I am not privy to any insights from either Harit or Rajiv, so all that follows is speculation on my part. I have put down what I would have been through if I had been part of the discussion.

First question - should the pug be junked? Screams of "murder" from consumers, who love this adorable little creature. But...the pug may not be the right creative idea to tie in all the various aspects of the brand any more. Consider this: the pug began life on the proposition of wide network. Later on, it personified quality customer service. But could it be used to cover other propositions? The answer - test it out, see how far the idea goes, see what boundaries it can't cross.

Second question - what other property should we create? What are the parameters? Obviously, it must be applicable across a wide variety of product and service propositions, and must be relevant, charming and engaging over time. Obviously, only then could this be called a 'property'. Hence, create some alternatives, and test these out for size, stretchability across current propositions, and even across propositions which are not yet available in this market. That's where the 30 TV spots that Bobby talks about fits in. These, and many more, must have been fleshed out much before production, just to test the idea.

Third question - should the pug and the new property live together, each with its own 'spheres' of application? Quick answer: no way. Why can't we create one single property which answers to question two? Only if we fail (and why should we assume that we shall fail?) shall we consider this sub-optimal option.

If we are serious about creating an asset - like some new technology, a new pharma molecule, an office building, or any other things we normally call an "asset" - we must think like other industries when they create properties. And not like ad agencies and their clients appear to do - you'll see so many examples of shoddy or no thinking at all in IPL 2, that individual examples are unnecessary.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Who do you believe – a coda

For those of you who did get through the “Who do you believe” piece, and are curious to know how it all panned out at the end, I have two pieces of news for you. First, the story gets murkier and murkier. Second, the butler did NOT do it.

You will recall that we had left the story poised at the brink – will he or won’t he? Let me decode: will Sir Fred the Shred Goodwin apologise to shareholders, stakeholders, employees, taxpayers and the pizza delivery man for screwing up the bank and colluding to screw up the nation’s economy? Or won’t he?

As it turns out, he apparently did murmur some words, which was construed by lip-readers to be tantamount to an apology, if we stretch the meaning of the word ‘apology’. Attaboy, our Fred! Unfortunately, John McFall, Treasury select committee chairman in the UK, refused to accept the apology as being anything meaningful.

Read these:

1. The Sunday Times, on February 15, 2009, carried a story in its online edition, starting “Nobody is too rich or powerful to escape the caustic Glaswegian wit of the chairman of the Treasury select committee…”

“On Tuesday it was the turn of Sir Fred Goodwin and Sir Tom McKillop, formerly chief executive and chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland respectively, and Andy Hornby and Lord Stevenson, who held the same positions at Halifax Bank of Scotland. McFall’s first question was: were they sorry for the destruction of once-venerable institutions now partly owned by the government and costing taxpayers millions? All four apologised but even after a three-hour grilling, McFall wasn’t convinced.

“There was no sense of real contrition,” he says. “They didn’t seem to think they were personally culpable. It’s not part of their culture. They have a sense of entitlement. Getting bonuses is in their DNA and risk taking is at their core — until the extent of their cavalier risk taking is uncovered and the whole thing implodes.” …

“The next day, addressing the current chief executives of the banks, McFall asked them why they thought they were hated. “I don’t know what they thought of that but John Varley, of Barclays, did admit that trust in the industry had been lost. I think it will take years to recover. This is a difficult time to rebuild confidence.”

2. BBC News - 14 February 2009 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7889665.stm)

Headline: Banking bosses head for a McFall

If "sorry" is the word of the moment, then a certain McFall is the man of the moment.

“The chairman of the Treasury select committee has taken centre stage at Westminster, managing to extract apology after apology from the four men held responsible, by some, for the entire UK banking crisis…

“The man of the moment knows how to grab the attention. “Is sorry the hardest part?" was his opening gambit to the deposed chairmen and chief executives of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Halifax Bank of Scotland.

“Unconvinced by their apologies, he questioned their contrition. “What exactly are you apologising for? We've been told you've been coached extensively and meticulously by PR people and lots of money has been spent, so are you expressing sympathy because your PR advisers advised you to do so?"

"No," said the bankers, but Mr McFall's disdain was plain to see - and the public relations damage was done. “

Things get worse from here. Some people wistfully regretted that the great democratizer, the guillotine, is now firmly ensconced in the pages of history.

3. BBC News - 9 February 2009 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/bbc_parliament/7879616.stm)

Headline: Bank ex-bosses to face committee grilling

Four former bank chiefs who led their institutions to the verge of collapse are set to testify before the treasury committee.

Reports have emerged recently that RBS may nonetheless distribute a total of £1bn in bonuses to staff.

The revelation has prompted outcry among politicians, press and public alike.

Lib Dem (Liberal Democratic Party) Treasury spokesman Vince Cable, writing in the Daily Mail, said that the "financial aristocracy" were "lucky the British have no guillotines in stock".

Similarly, the Independent's Simon Carr argues that "revenge is the answer".

Even worse, people have demanded that the bank bosses should return their past bonuses – surely the most unkindest cut of all.

4. “The Sunday Times, on February 15, 2009, carried a story in its online edition, headlined “Bank chiefs urged to repay bonuses”,

“Treasury select committee chairman John McFall says it is morally right for bosses who brought banks close to collapse to pay back rewards…Senior executives of HBOS and Royal Bank of Scotland, whose irresponsible speculating brought the British banking system to its knees, are to be urged to hand back the multi-million pound bonuses they awarded themselves.

“A report by the Treasury select committee will conclude that, while MPs cannot legally confiscate the six-figure rewards the bankers received over the past two years, it is morally right for them to return the cash.

“The report, due out in April, is expected to be scathing about Sir Tom McKillop, the former RBS chairman, Sir Fred Goodwin, the former RBS chief executive, and Andy Hornby and Lord Stevenson, the former chief executive and chairman of HBOS, for failing to show enough contrition when they gave evidence last week.”

The sponsorship deals that RBS signed up has come in for a great deal of abuse. Sachin Tendulkar has even been asked to return the money he got from modelling for the RBS ad which started me off on this journey!

5. Brand Republic - 16-Feb-09, 09:05
(http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/881116/RBS-attacked-spending-200m-celebrity-sponsorship/)

Headline: RBS attacked for spending £200m on celebrity sponsorship

“The Royal Bank of Scotland, bailed out with billions of pounds of taxpayers' money, is under fire for blowing £200m on sponsorship deals with top sports stars including Zara Phillips, Andy Murray and Jack Nicklaus.

“Mann has called for the sports stars to volunteer to opt out of their lucrative contracts. He said: "I think it would go down very well with the British public if some of them were to cancel their contracts. Some of them would become real heroes if they did."…

6. Yahoo India News - Sun, Feb 15 09:32 PM
(http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20090215/928/tsp-reckless-rbs-signed-sachin-others-fo.html)

Headline: 'Reckless' RBS signed Sachin, others for 200 mn pounds

“A spendthrift Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) spent 200 million pounds on sponsorship deals with Sachin Tendulkar and other top sportsmen just weeks before being bailed out by the British government, a newspaper reported Sunday…

“The news comes after the bank announced that it had made a loss of 28 billion pounds last year.

“Treasury select committee member MP John Mann told the paper: 'They have been reckless yet again. This doesn't seem to be a bank that could do anything in moderation. It now needs to realise the golden days are over.'

Now, why am I going on and on about this seriously unwholesome sordid saga, which has obviously caused a lot of disgust and contempt for the top execs of RBS, and almost killed the brand?

Because I believe that the spin community and the brand owners need to take a bunch of lessons out of this.

A brand’s reputation is far more important and certainly more fragile than its image. The reputation is built on how it conducts business and deals with people, not just consumers and customers, but the community at large. The reputation of a bank is built over decades and the foundation of the reputation is two words – trust and respect. The first you provide to your constituents, and demonstrably so; the second you earn.

Advertising and PR won’t save a brand when both have been lost.

The TV spot which started me off on this long story teaches us that sometimes, the best thing that spin doctors can do for their clients is to tell them to lie low and say nuffink. There’s a whole world of practical wisdom in Brer Rabbit.

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Who do you believe?

That unredeemed ornery rascal of a rock’n’roller, Bo Diddley, wrote a song which has been covered by millions of would-be rockers:


I walk 47 miles of barbed wire,
I use a cobra-snake for a necktie,
I got a brand new house on the roadside,
Made from rattlesnake hide,
I got a brand new chimney made on top,
Made out of a human skull,
Now come on take a walk with me, Arlene,
And tell me, who do you love?


Now, I have walked a few thousand miles up and down ad agency and client corridors, and once I did think of using cobra-snake-lookalike for a necktie but agency dress codes prevented me from doing so (maybe I was just plain chicken!). And now that I am out of the agency-client game, I know who I do trust, and who I would believe.

These thoughts were provoked by an ad I saw some weeks ago, in which Sachin Tendulkar was being measured for a suit, and the voice-over and supers went something like this: "Every now and again, a player appears on the scene… who will change the way the game is played."

The client sign-off showed Royal bank of Scotland, with their slogan “Make it happen TM”. (I have taken the text out of the bank’s website - http://www.rbs.in/ - and there may be some slight differences between the site text and the ad voice-over, supers, etc. But these differences are not at all significant.) The website also went on to say: “Like RBS ambassador Sachin Tendulkar, we believe that actions speak louder than words. That's why we've become one of the largest banks in the world with a reputation for helping customers get things done.”

RBS, RBS…that set me thinking and then rushing to my comp. I remembered having read a whole lot of bad news, real bad news about RBS from about mid 2008 till earlier this week. A little digging around and here’s some of them, the latest one first:

1. From The Guardian, Wednesday - 28 January 2009 headlined “Pay packet envy: the greed that drove the City's bonus culture; The men who made millions while the banking system crumbled” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/28/executive-salaries-banking)

It was Valentine's Day and for Sir Fred Goodwin there was a very special present. The youthful banking executive was one of elite group of Royal Bank of Scotland directors handed bonus cheques totalling £2.5m as reward for clinching control of the ailing high street lender NatWest.

The payments created a furore but Sir George Mathewson, the plain talking RBS executive who had led the eight month campaign, could not understand what the fuss was about. "They wouldn't give you bragging power in a Soho wine bar," an unrepentant Mathewson said.

The bonuses helped drive RBS along its road to ruin. The bank's executives got the deal-making bug and embarked on an orgy of acquisitions, gobbling up more than 24 companies in the next eight years - culminating in the £50bn record-breaking takeover of ABN Amro just as the credit crunch started to bite.

Nine years on, the bonuses help illustrate what happens when pay deals reward risk taking and highlight the gulf in pay between boardroom bosses and those who work in the City, earning even bigger bonuses through private pay deals that do not have to be published.

"Without question my research points to the fact large companies seem to have been paid for getting bigger not better. We saw that with RBS," said Peter Hahn, a fellow in finance at Cass Business School.

2. From The Guardian - Monday 26 January 2009 – headlined “Police asked to investigate RBS for mis-selling” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/26/police-investigate-rbs)

Police are under pressure to launch an investigation into the Royal Bank of Scotland's £12bn rights issue after a complaint by a member of the Scottish parliament.

The Lothian and Borders force confirmed yesterday it was conducting inquiries into whether the bank fraudulently sought investment from shareholders, many of them UK pension funds, knowing that the bank was insolvent.

3. From The Guardian - Monday 26 January 2009 – “Twenty-five people at the heart of the meltdown ...” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/26/road-ruin-recession-individuals-economy)

Fairly prominent in this list is Sir Fred Goodwin, former RBS boss. Here’s what the article has to say about him:

Once one of Gordon Brown's favourite businessmen, now the prime minister says he is "angry" with the man dubbed "Fred the Shred" for his strategy at Royal Bank of Scotland, which has left the bank staring at a £28bn loss and 70% owned by the government. The losses will reflect vast lending to businesses that cannot repay and write-downs on acquisitions masterminded by Goodwin stretching back years.

4. From guardian.co.uk - January 19, 2009 – headline “Government takes 68% stake in Royal Bank of Scotland” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/19/rbs-second-bailout)

Loss-making Royal Bank of Scotland pledged to step up lending to big corporates and lend a further £6bn to a wide range of customers as part of an agreement with the government to increase its stake in the troubled Edinburgh-based bank to 68%.

As shares in RBS lost two thirds of their value to close at just 11.9p today, the government altered the terms of the October bail out to allow preference shares - which do not carry voting rights - to convert into ordinary shares almost immediately.

5. December 30, 2008 – headlined “Thirty years on - the truth at last” (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article5415971.ece)

December 31, 2038: Royal Bank of Scotland came close to being fully nationalised as early as autumn 2008, according to documents made public for the first time today. (Blogger’s note: the 2038 dateline is exactly as it appears on the website!)

…The documents confirm speculation at the time that the Bank of England, the FSA and Mr Darling were “exceptionally worried” about the ability of RBS to roll over its short-term funding in money markets by early October.

One handwritten note from an unnamed Bank of England official to the Chancellor, dated Thursday, October 2, 2008, reads: “RBS is having enormous difficulty raising short-term funds... danger of confidence draining away completely... there is a real question over whether it will be able to open its doors for business next week.”

6. From November 29, 2008 – “Sir Fred Goodwin takes the hit as shareholders spurn £15billion rights issue by bank (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5254438.ece)

Sir Fred Goodwin, the outgoing chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland, made a personal loss on paper of £162,000 yesterday after subscribing for his full entitlement of shares in the bank's disastrous £15billion rights issue.

As expected, the Government was left with almost all the new shares, giving it a stake of 58 per cent in the enlarged bank, after existing shareholders shunned the emergency capital-raising. Only 0.24 per cent of the new shares were taken up, some of them by RBS directors who had promised to take up their rights in full before it became apparent that the deal was a flop.

7. From guardian.co.uk – November 6, 2008 – headline “Downgrades hit Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/marketforceslive/2008/nov/06/barclay-royalbankofscotlandgroup)

More downgrades for the banks today.

Panmure Gordon analyst Sandy Chen has repeated his sells on Barclays - down 8.5p to 187.4p - and Royal Bank of Scotland - 1.8p lower at 67.2p. Both these banks bounced slightly yesterday on talk they would benefit from a UK rate cut, and had been oversold. Chen does not agree. He said:

"There has been a slew of news [on credit default swaps] recently – little of it positive. We see [Barclays and RBS] as most exposed to further losses as credit events gain momentum…”

8. From November 5, 2008 – headline “Royal Bank of Scotland faces its first full-year loss, new chief admits (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5084726.ece)

Stephen Hester, Royal Bank of Scotland’s new chief executive, admitted yesterday that the troubled bank could report its first full-year loss as he attempts to sell £15 billion of new stock to disgruntled investors. …Mr Hester, who takes over from the ousted Sir Fred Goodwin in January, said that he would take the bank back to its retail and commercial banking roots by stripping out “excess leverage”. Asked about claims by analysts that the bank would make a full-year loss, he said: “I’m not wildly disputing what you claim analysts are saying.”

9. From October 15, 2008 – headline “Shredding credibility at Royal Bank of Scotland (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article4945074.ece)

Under normal circumstances, if a company expands recklessly, faces collapse and needs an emergency rescue, the very least you can do, on showing the executives responsible the door, is to clean out those non-executives who failed in their job of restraining such over-enthusiasm.

Yet I am told there is no intention to dispose of the 14 - count them - 14 non-executives at Royal Bank of Scotland immediately, most of whom sat back while Sir Fred “The Shred” Goodwin galloped madly over the precipice with last summer's purchase of ABN Amro.

10. From Timesonline.co.uk - October 13, 2008 – headlined “Royal Bank of Scotland under state control” – (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4932250.ece)

The Chancellor will move to take control of the Royal Bank of Scotland today by injecting £20 billion of taxpayers’ money….Sir Fred Goodwin is expected to step down today as chief executive of the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). Andy Hornby, the chief executive of HBOS, also faces an uncertain future.

RBS will offer its shareholders the right to buy £15 billion of new shares, the vast majority of which are expected to be left with the Government, giving it a 60 per cent stake.


And my favourite, the killer piece of them all:

11. From The Guardian - 24 January, 2009 – headlined “Sir Fred, just say sorry” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/24/fred-goodwin-rbs)

Goodwin's descent from hero to zero is as shocking as his bank's finances. This week it was announced that the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) had suffered a £28bn loss - the biggest loss a company has recorded in Britain. Shares crashed by two-thirds overnight. Now it is valued at £5bn compared with last year's £50bn - and this despite the government pouring in £20bn in bail-out money.

He had been Gordon Brown's favourite banker, until the prime minister turned on him this week, saying that RBS had been "irresponsible" under Goodwin's control (and it has to be said on Brown's watch). Over the past year, Goodwin received salary and bonuses amounting to £4.2m.

In 2002, he was named Forbes Businessman of the Year - the ultimate business accolade. Back then he was known as Fred the Shred for the incisive way he had shredded staff numbers to boost profits. Today Goodwin, who formally leaves his post on 31 January, is known as the "disgraced Fred the Red". Goodwin can take some comfort in an annual £579,000 pension.

Phew! If that’s not a litany of woes and wrongdoing, I don’t know what is. Caveat: the venom, the sarcasm, and the caustic language are there in the originals – I haven’t added anything; didn’t have to.

The RBS people in India obviously knew all this, and more, that the media back home was saying about them. So question 1: Did they assume that their TG in India was ignorant of all that’s going on about the bank back home in the UK? Or did they assume that the advertising will sufficiently counteract the bad PR they were getting?

RBS sure did change the way the game is played, and are now in the process of paying for it. They did make it happen – seriously. They did get things done, for their shareholders, their customers, and the poor sods of taxpayers out there in the UK.

Is this the kind of bank you wish to make things happen for you?

Question 2: Why did RBS India release this ad? Surely their PR and ad agencies would have told them not to do it – if I’ve read the news articles, all that the ad will raise with me is a nasty snigger. I guess people would believe editorial more than advertising – so why do this?

The ruins of the reputation of RBS are surely made out of human skull.

Oh, in case you wondered, Sir Fred didn’t apologise. Read this:

Telegraph.co.uk - 20 Nov 2008 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/rbs/3490576/RBS-issues-sweeping-apology-to-shareholders.html)

Headline: RBS issues sweeping apology to shareholders

Sir Tom McKillop, chairman of Royal Bank of Scotland, has issued a sweeping apology for the dramatic implosion of the banking giant.

Sir Tom told a shareholders meeting in Edinburgh to approve a £20bn capital raising: "Both personally and in the office I hold, I am profoundly sorry about the position that we have reached".

RBS has been attacked by employees and shareholders who have said the bank's management has not apologised for its near-collapse in October, which put tens of thousands of jobs at risk. RBS has already announced 3,000 redundancies.

Sir Tom attempted to answer that criticism, telling shareholders gathered at the Church of Scotland general assembly hall on the Mound in Edinburgh: "The buck stops with me as chairman and with the leadership of the Group. Accountability has been allocated and fully accepted."

RBS was told by the Government to raise an extra £20bn of capital to bolster its balance sheet. When the bank unveiled the fund raising on October 13 it said Sir Tom would step down as chairman of RBS in April, while Sir Fred Goodwin, chief executive, leaves today. Sir Fred has said he is "sad" about the dire state of the bank but so far has declined to apologise to shareholders and employees.

For he’s a jolly good fellow…