Today M&S unveils its much heralded (and briefly trailed) current account.  The decision to go into high street banking looks well timed – whatever the current concerns over its fashion lines the public trusts M&S, and trust is in very short supply in financial services at present. Therefore, M&S going into current accounts and mortgages had the potential to be a good move.

Now we see the detail.  It’s going to cost £20 per month with travel  insurance, or £15 per month without.  The £20 option is up there with the most expensive non private banking options on the high street, and in return you get vouchers off clothing and food and drink purchases in store.

So it’s basically a customer loyalty move – the big boys of high street banking can breathe a sigh of relief.

Or can they?

Nationwide and the Co-operative Bank have both reported strong week on week increases in current account enquiries in the wake of the LIBOR scandal, and the collapse of the RBS computer system.  Nationwide in particular has been hammering home its message of being on the consumers’ side, with full page adverts and wraparounds on the business pages of the Sunday broadsheets.  Also, if the Co-Op/Lloyds deal goes through, we could see the Co-Op with 7% of the market, and 10% of the UK branch network.

There are alternatives to the high street banks, and the signs are that people are starting to look more closely at them than ever before.  This presents a challenge to the established players to up their game in understanding what their customers want, and to the new boys in terms of getting a distinctive message across that can explain why they are different (and, in an industry where trust can’t be taken for granted, why they should be believed…..).

The disruptor of the industry is unlikely to be M&S though, at least not on their current showing.

The world of financial reporting was startled last Friday (always a good day to catch people napping) with the announcement by Marks & Spencer that it is going to launch an in-store banking service this summer, in partnership with HSBC.

M&S aims to have 50 branches up and running in its stores in the next two years, with 500 jobs created by the end of 2013.

The high street banking sector has been due a bit of shaking up for a while, but what looks like an interesting tie-up still came out of left-field.  On the face of it, this isn’t quite what the doctor ordered.  HSBC is going to be the owner of the accounts and the customers, with a 50:50 profit share arrangement for M&S, so we’re not seeing the entry of a new player in the market, so much as an extension of choice (and convenience) for current M&S shoppers.

And yet.

M&S and HSBC have a track record in financial product provision – M&S Money has been owned by the bank since 2004, and the extension into current accountsand mortgages looks like a logical extension.  In any case, there’s always the possibility that if the new venture is successful then M&S might look to take things completely in house somewhere down the line – as Tesco Bank did with its divorce from erstwhile partner RBS.

Observers have been pretty unanimous in seeing this move by M&S as a range extension, rather than a genuine new dawn for High Street banking, but I wouldn’t be so categoric.

The same names have been coming up in the industry for a couple of years now as the big potential disrupters, but so far have made little more than a ripple; from Metro Bank with its vision of convenient, no-frills banking, through to Handelsbanken, with its proposition of “forward to the 1950s!” Both brands have real potential, but I wonder if there’s the space for them to grow to their full potential in a saturated market space.

The astute observer might keep half an eye on the Co-Operative Bank, which really ought to be making hay in the current climate with its avowedly and overtly ”ethical” proposition, yet which somehow hasn’t yet seized the moment.

In the meantime, we might have to look towards one of the nation’s great retailers for the next step forward in the banking industry – at least the packaging ought to be eyecatching!

In its role as a constant source of inspiration on cutting-edge subjects, Contagious magazine recently ran an article on the trend of Newsjacking. In most people’s vocabulary, ‘Jacking’ has certain connotations – in this case around the removal or theft of an item – however what the article outlines is a trend for brands borrowing, stealing or hijacking memes* in order to present their own message. The act of Newsjacking, therefore, is the act of piggybacking on existing events, and if correctly executed can be a shortcut to engendering consumer goodwill.

Branded content is of growing importance in the marcomms budget and if successful it can provide low cost engagement with consumers who will transmit it free of charge across social media if it proves to be engaging enough.

One piece of engaging content that picked up numerous awards and generated over three and half million YouTube hits, as well as millions more for associated brand videos, was K-Swiss CEO Kenny Powers’ video. In the video, a character from television series “Eastbound and Down” was inserted as the CEO of K-Swiss. Please be warned: the viral itself is not for the faint-hearted or easily offended.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI_9Yxr0blo

The difference between content and Newsjacking is that for branded content, there is not necessarily any current meme to hijack –  so the content can be created differently. Where Newsjacking is concerned, the risk for the brand is heightened, as public interaction with a new story can be potentially disastrous if the interaction comes across as domineering, foolish or cynical. One such example of the risk involved comes from apparel brand Kenneth Cole, whose namesake and founder attempted to Newsjack during the recent uprising in Egypt by tweeting;

‘Millions are in uproar in #Cairo. Rumour is they heard that our new spring collection is now available online at http://bit.ly/KCairo – KC’

Unfortunately Kenneth’s cultural dials were wrongly tuned to the frequency and backlash from the Twitterati was swift and punishing. Read the full story here.

So for any brands out there looking for their next source for content creation simply open a newspaper and follow these simple rules:

• Make sure you are responding to a meme recognised by the mainstream
• Be the first to react
• Make it tasteful: bad news travels faster than good
• Make it impactful – but without transgressing bullet point 3

Or contact The Value Engineers to talk to us about your Digital Strategy.

What’s the first thing that to springs to mind when thinking about grasshoppers, crickets and caterpillars? I’m willing to bet it isn’t mmm… delicious! Yet this is exactly what four students from the Royal College of Art are trying to pioneer with their new brand Ento.

On a rational level there are many arguments for the human consumption of insects. Global food demand is outpacing population growth and is set to double by 2050. The current livestock industry is notoriously resource-hungry and has a large carbon footprint, not to mention some dubious ethical issues over the years. As a food source, insects are inherently more efficient, producing nearly ten times the amount of meat as cattle from the same quantity of feed. And it’s high quality meat too – only 16% fat, compared to the 48% found in beef.

For Westerners though, the thought of eating insects is a cultural taboo, something confined to ‘I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here!’ However, for cultures across Asia, Latin America and Africa eating insects (or entomophagy to give it its official title) is nothing unusual. So why are we so afraid of putting the little buggers in our mouths?

It comes down to preconceptions that they are dirty, gooey, and unsafe – none of which are true. In fact, they have a meaty, sometimes crunchy texture with a subtle, savoury taste. Clearly a cultural leap is required.

One key insight provided a starting point for the RCA students – the more abstracted the dish (in other words the less it looked like actual insects) the more open consumers were to trying it. This in itself is not exactly surprising, however the subtle take away is how powerful the abstraction effect is – even a superficial layer of breadcrumbs is enough to do the trick. The idea is that this will provide a gateway to further products and services as the concept gains acceptance.

Before you completely dismiss the idea of using cricket mince for your Spaghetti Bolognese, consider a British tourist guide from 30 years ago warning about the strange and off-putting Japanese habit of eating raw fish; now you can buy sushi at Boots and Marks & Spencers, two of the most quintessentially British retailers. So perhaps one day fresh insects will be a regular sight on supermarket shelves. Watch this space.

Sony’s release of its Apple (iOS) compatible Music Unlimited streaming service, intended to challenge Spotify’s iPhone app, is a natural and welcome step in line with changing customer music needs and behaviours (http://www.thevalueengineers.com/2012/01/26/spotify-the-low-key-music-revolutionary/). Streaming is the future for all forms of digital entertainment, and music is leading the charge.

But I think Sony is missing a trick here. They offer two subscription packages: $3.99/month for listening to pre-determined channels (radio-style?) and $9.99 for access to Sony’s music library consisting of 15 million songs. Spotify’s catalogue has long surpassed 15 million, but more importantly, there is no clear incentive for any one customer group to switch to Music Unlimited.

As I have argued before, Spotify’s finest trick was to get people hooked in the first place by offering free music access. Here at The Value Engineers, we see time and again that consumers do not appreciate the value of technological innovation until they’ve tried it themselves. There are high barriers to adoption in place, and only a truly motivating and appealing incentive will push people to give new technology a go – and therefore fully experience the benefits that innovation offers.

Sony is not offering any such incentive. There is no free service to get customers to buy in, so Music Unlimited will struggle to convert iTunes/CD people to streaming. And for those of us who are with Spotify – well, there are no clear benefits to switching. And switching is a pain in itself.

One thing’s for sure: the Battle of Streaming has only just begun.

Sony's Music Unlimited