LA2M

Yesterday, I attended a (new to me) networking lunch, called LA2M. It was sort of the typical format for these things, with time to network in the beginning, a presentation, and time to introduce yourself to everyone at the end. The topic was presented by Chris Kochmanski of Design Hub in Ann Arbor regarding old school marketing of direct mail and telemarketing for high-end service businesses. It was an interesting look into how these programs still work when done well.

I found the topic to be interesting, and found the group to be a good opportunity for networking with other marketing (and non-marketing) folks and entrepreneurs.

If you're interested, here's a list of upcoming topics.

Marketing Science and Art

This morning I read a quick post from Seth Godin's blog on whether marketing is a science or art (hint: its both).

This got me to thinking: no question that with my strategic planning background I fall into the science category in most cases, and I totally agree with Seth that the main problem for us science-types is that humans are the wild card in the "system". The artist side of marketing is much more likely to better understand the human wild-ness and react to that creatively and passionately that resonates with actual humans. However, as a science-type marketer, I come back to the fact that much of business can be measured (sales, profit, return on investment, shareholder value, debt-to-equity, share price, etc.). When it comes to marketing, many clients at the end of the day are going to be forced to tie their marketing to these measurable metrics.

So, how do you balance the two? How do you look at art and creative and make it "fit" into these business metrics? Fact is, often you can't, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try. Outstanding art will often fall flat because it doesn't generate sales. Terrible creative will often excel because it does generate sales.

As Seth says at the end of his blog, "Figure out what sort of marketing you're going to do today and go do that" and I couldn't agree more. The challenge for us as marketers is to not think of these two sides of marketing as adversarial. I believe the two complement each other very well. When they work together to understand the relationship between wild card humans and bottom line business metrics, advertising works well for clients.

Photo credit: Gaetan Lee, 2007, via flickr.com

A logo that says something

If nothing else, this logo and name are entertaining:



I am not sure that I really need to add anything else to it. I saw this will reading Urban Velo and thought to myself, "that is a very logical logo."
Aggressive and targeted... those offended by this, probably aren't the target audience. Hardcore skiers, runners, bikers, workers, and others who might need this are unlikely to be offended. They are also likely to know what it does without even reading any further (fyi: its helps those who "suffer from chaffing and want something made from natural ingredients like beeswax, coconut oil, almond oil and vitamin E.")

How about a little optimism here?

I am often critical of ads or just foisting my opinion about them on unsuspecting folks who don't realize they asked. I recognize that this can come across as a somewhat pessimistic attitude towards marketing sometimes. With all the rest of the pessimistic economic news these days, I thought I'd put together a positive message with some useful information for you.

With all the bad news that we're being bombarded with these days, its easy to forget that now is a perfect time for nimble companies with well defined products for well defined customers.

That's a big concept so lets break it down a little:
Nimble companies - Many entrepreneurs that I talk to are encouraged by the economic news right now. Why? Because as the big corporate competitors are cutting on products and marketing, that's opening up an opportunity for entrepreneurs who can fill the niche left behind. But the key word here is "nimble". The risk in the market is still there, and you have to be ready to react (or better yet preempt). For example, a coffee shop that I've worked with in the past serves clientele who are professional, high-income, and are willing to pay for a high-quality product. However, the shop found that as Starbucks and another independent coffee shop closed, he was starting to see a different clientele - younger, not as affluent, more interested in quick foods to go with their coffee. Within the week of recognizing this trend, the shop partnered with a deli to offer cold sandwiches at the shop and introduced a new blend of coffee for 99 cents. However, he didn't change the current offerings and actually upgraded his chairs in order to keep his appeal to his current more affluent customers.

Well-defined customers - Most entrepreneurs that I know come to me and say something similar to "I've invented this new widget and it does X, Y, and Z" or "I've noticed there are not any widget stores in Cityville" and then they go on to talk about their product and how it will be successful. In my years in the research world, I've always found this to be the backwards way to approach the problem. Start with describing your customers. I always work to guide the conversation towards, "I've invented this new widget, and the reason it will be successful is because it solves X demographic's problems with X, Y, and Z." What this does is change the way you look at things. Seth Godin, a writer on marketing, said just yesterday on a webcast from bnet that the key to success is to seek products for your customers, not customers for your products. It takes a little creativity and a lot of hard work, but I couldn't agree with this theory more completely.

Well-defined products - As a marketing consultant, I am constantly attempting to explain to my friends what it is exactly that I do. It's an interesting challenge for those who are not in the business world (but that's ok, they don't need to know what I do). However, my potential clients do need to know. So, I've spent the last three weeks developing a very long list first of everything I offer, then I've narrowed it down into a more focused list based on the customers who I have identified as my targets. So, while I can design logos and do copywriting, my ideal clients do not care. They do care that I create marketing plans, identify targets, and develop tactics and advertising creative briefs to provide direction.

I can hear the folks getting ready to tell me now, "but if you are nimble, shouldn't that mean offering a wider variety of products to a wider audience?" I say not exactly... The target customer may be of a wider variety, but I still have to know who they are and what they are looking for in order to offer a product that caters to them. The coffee shop widened its product offering, but only after identifying what the customers wanted. If you can't identify a customer for the product, ask yourself, why would they choose me? The coffee shop didn't see that Starbucks had offered sandwiches and jumping to the conclusion that he probably needs to in order to pick up those customers. He identified what the customers wanted.

If you focus on those three things, you'll have an excellent start to an outstanding marketing plan.

There's a lesson in all of this.

In the words of reality tv show fans, the world is a "hot mess" (if you listen to the pundits, that is). That's part of the reason why President-elect Obama's message of Hope played so well this election season. But there are other marketing-related reasons why he did so well...
- he had a much more consistent and singular message than his rival
- he had a huge following of younger activists that were engaged and participating
- he presented a compelling image that was easy to understand and get behind

I'm not at all going to dive into the specifics of policies between the two campaigns or examine ideology or tax policy or anything political really, that's not the point to this article. But what I do want to look further into a few things that I gleaned from that second point...

Obama's campaign was very effective at "getting out the vote." A lot of individuals got involved and many, I believe, felt a tangible part of Obama's election because of their participation. (Ok, I'm not going to argue that this is a simplistic view of what occured, but again, we're not talking politics in this article, its just to see the lesson for us marketers. And that's all.) I have several friends who participated in the Obama campaign, some traveling great distances to canvass or offer help. Some took time off work to do community events for Obama. And when I speak to them about it (once you get past the politics), the reason is because they felt they were physically doing something that they were passionate about.

Earlier I posted an article about DIY projects and why those appeal to me. I suspect that there are fundamentally similar things going on deep inside the brain of community activists for Obama: These community activities are hands-on, they are interesting (moreso than people's day-to-day activities), they are social, and a fourth item (not included in the DIY article but I think applies to both), is that they tap into people's passion (you may not be passionate about calling strangers during dinnertime, but are passionate about the cause).

There's three important lessons for marketers in this:

1. To get interest from people to participate in your branding or marketing, you are going to have to make it interesting, hands-on, and social. Just putting a message out there, that doesn't have aspects these three things is going to be dropped quickly by target consumers.
2. To compel people (stronger than just interest in), you have to tap into their passion.
3. Finally, the conversion to action for both the campaign and a brand is a critical final step, that is often ignored

That final step of converting "potential customers" into current customers is what is going to make the difference between an interesting conversation with folks vs. having a business relationship with them.

The coffee wars...

Dunkin Donuts is launching a new "taste test" ad that targets Starbucks. This is brilliantly timed campaign showing the results of an independent taste test (well, paid for by Dunkin Donuts, but conducted by an independent 3rd party research company) that shows that Dunkin Donuts won in a blind test of taste.

I say this is brilliantly timed because as the economy continues to slip into "recession" as consumers continue to tighten their belts, pricey luxuries (such as $4 coffee) is likely to be one of the items trimmed back by consumers. If Dunkin Donuts can convince consumers that their coffee is just as good, but cheaper and not an expensive luxury, then they could definitely positioned to see some nice customer conquests.

However, as a guy who roasts his own coffee, I see a huge opportunity to make gains on the financial incentive of brewing at home. There are some other "convenience" costs (cleaning, brewing, etc.), but with some clever positioning and promotion of some of the easy to use automatic machines that make having your coffee ready in the morning (or whenever) easier and tastier than ever.

This is where the value proposition for smaller roasters will really stand out. A cup of coffee brewed at home, even accounting for cream and sugar costs about 20-25 cents. So, the accountants will be satisfied (the "bean counters!" - sorry couldn't resist). The next hurdle will be trying to get over the extra work that is involved, particularly the cleaning process. For marketers convincing people to make the switch to home-brewed coffee will have to be demonstrate how this step is easier than most may expect. There are some larger trends that are also pointing to the success of this move, particularly an increase in homebased businesses (losing access to office coffee, definitely increased my home consumption of coffee).

With that, I'm headed back to the coffee shop (aka kitchen counter) for another cup of perfectly brewed coffee.

Good Marketing for Bad Times

It's no secret that the Detroit area has been hit pretty hard by the economy. This all started about a year ago (or longer) here. The latest national news sounds like just a rehash of problems that Detroit has been living with for a while. When the economy tanks, there is a lot of news about big changes in American's lives. For example, a poll for Fortune Magazine from January 2008 shows that even back then (doesn't that seem like a long time ago now??)....

• Almost half have been cutting back on spending
• 4 in 10 believe that their personal economic situation has gotten worse in the last 12 months
• 1 in 4 believe that gas (and energy) prices are responsible for the slowing economy

Add to this the horror stories about getting financing we're hearing right now (auto loan refusal is at its highest rate since 1984, according to Businessweek), and you may find yourself wanting to run for the hills.

So, is it time to close up shop and take a long nap until this storm blows over? Hardly. It's time to get to work. From that same Fortune survey...

• Half believe that their personal economic situation has not changed in the last 12 months (15% believe it has improved)
• Almost 3 in 4 have been able to keep up with their credit card payments, and 9 in 10 are able to keep up with other payments (such as mortgage, rent, car payments, etc.)

What this tells me is that there is still money out there, and a savvy business can survive (some may even thrive) in this difficult environment. Additionally, there's an excellent change to set the stage to have your brand be force when this storm does pass. But it's not a time to cut back on that marketing budget. The key to surviving or thriving in this kind of economic environment comes down to refocusing your brand:

• Awareness Is Not the Ultimate Goal - while no one with any sense will tell you that awareness isn't important, keep in mind that just telling people you exist is not the ultimate goal of any marketing that your doing. A friend of mine runs a bike shop that sponsors a lot of events with a tent, repair equipment, staff, and even items to sell. A while back, I asked him why he sponsored them and the answer was "awareness" so that folks know about the shop. But if that's the goal, why spend the time, money, and energy to actually show up? He could have just sent a banner to do the same thing. The real goal of these sponsorships is to move one step past awareness to get entered into the consideration set for purchase (or even make a few sales at the event!). This is the start to an emotional attachment (something very difficult for banners to do by themselves).
  
• Find Marketing Activities that Connect with Customers Emotionally - one of the first things that get cut out of a budget are a business that don't add an emotional value for consumers. Consider Netflix: as they expand further into social networking so that consumers can share their movie lists or take recommendations from friends, the activity becomes more of a social outlet, a connection. This strengthens the emotional connection to the Netflix brand and reduces the likelihood that it ends up on the household budget chopping block.
• Deliver Greater Value with your Marketing - greater value is OFTEN talked about in board meetings and marketing meetings but seems to be lost or watered down too far to be actually useful by the time it hits the trenches. Award or frequent buyer programs are a great way to increase the value of marketing, and I think a very useful way to capitalize on viral marketing techniques. If you provided unique content, games, or parties for those who have X number of points or purchases at a level between your current "free stuff" or discount levels, folks are going to get more out of the path they are on with your brand.
• Understand Why/How People are Spending Money with You - As the household budget gets trimmed, folks are going to have to shift the way they spend their money. Maybe you'll be lucky enough not to be impacted by this, but chances are you've seen a change in sales in the last few months. Talk to your customers. Get a better understanding of what they are buying with you and why things may have changed. There's a chance that while you may not be able to talk them into spending a lot more, you may be able to make changes to the store layout or menu or whatever to help direct customers to more profitable items or items that supplement other products and thereby increase their value while increase the overall sale. But talk to you customers before you make substantial changes. They'll tell you the why and how they are making changes to their spending habits with you.

Now, obviously, it's not a time to relax, but it's not a time to panic and undermine your brand either.

Is your brand dead? Does imagery matter anymore? (Part II)

I (finally) finished the book, Branding Only Works on Cattle by Jonathan Salem Baskin. The basic premise is that communicating brands as we know it is actually dead. Before you start writing a eulogy for your long, lost pal, Tony the Tiger, Baskin does have some fascinating points. As you may recall from Part 1, I claimed to not be fully on board with Baskin’s claims in the book, then he called me out on some of my points (see comments from Sept 21 post).

Now that I’ve read it, I think that Baskin and I are not that far apart actually. I think that the main area we differ is in the definition of branding. I suspect that my textbook definition that I provided was not complete enough to clarify how I actually think of branding. Baskin summed it up perfectly on page 185 of the book:

“Company activities and customer perceptions are intertwined in many ways – communities, dependencies, partnerships, outsourcing, transactions, partnerships, product or service experiences, - and it is in these relationships that brand and business are realized. Brand is the verb of these behaviors made relevant to your bottom line.”

This definition of branding is a much more “practical” form than Tony the Tiger or the lust for Louis-Vuitton handbags implies (perhaps “useful” is the word that Baskin would use). I must admit that the more I thought about it, the more I agree with Baskin. His book lays out a nice road map, particularly for small or midsize businesses that are looking to grow and don’t quite get how branding could work for them.

In my opinion, if marketers (note that I don’t just limit this to branding experts) only take one thing from the book, it is to think of branding as game theory. Baskin purports that games have:

• Goals/a payoff – a purpose that requires an action (a.k.a. give branding a practical goal).
  
• Context – the universe where the game is actually played must guide the branding
  
• Narrative flow – prompt action, facilitate learning during the game, and then only talk to those who its relevant to talk to
• Use a variety of tools – the entire company is your toolbox (customer service, shipping, finance, etc.)
• Winners and Losers – engage with people to push them forward (winners), though there may be some that will therefore be pushed away (losers). That's ok, not everyone will buy your product anyway.
  

This kind of thinking, positive customer engagement with the company at a variety of points, is the definitely the direction branding communications needs to be moving.

So, am I a convert? Is branding dead?

Well, hold on a second. Brands are still very much alive. Another book I’m reading by Lucas Conley, “Obsessive Branding Disorder”, shows many different examples of branding out of control - both the comical (Christina Aguilera trademarking her name to market 450 separate products including modeling clay and contact lens) and the tragic (like New Orleans Mayor, Ray Nagin, who declared that New Orleans murder rate was “…not good for us, but keeps the New Orleans brand out there, and keeps people thinking about our needs…”). Conley proves that branding is still very much alive and still highly profitable (for both the branders and the branded business). People are still buying products because of its brand. But businesses are having to work harder, advertise in more places, and creative (read as, "crazy") things that in many cases make no sense to keep their brands in front of potential customers.

So, yes, Tony the Tiger is still going to don the cereal box and your kids will still scream for him. Louis-Vuitton will still drive people to buy (and make) cheap knock-offs. Paris Hilton will still draw millions of dollars for putting her name and likeness on perfume, bad music, or whatever else her agents think they can sell. A lot of companies will continue to brand in much the same method. But as Baskin (and Conley) points out, the challenges of communicating is getting increasing difficult, and the companies that can recognize this and truly connect with their customers on a variety of levels and points are the brands that will remain relevant and important.

The death of Fair Trade Certified marketing?

I read in Brandweek this week that marketers at Walmart, Target, and Starbucks (among other large retailers) "eye Fair Trade Certified as the new 'green'" marketing tool.

As someone who ran/runs a independent coffee roasting company, trying to compete with big chains is always a challenge. The juggernaut Starbucks not only sells many of the same products, but also has more locations and lots of marketing bucks behind that star. However, its not impossible, despite everything Starbucks does well. And, it helps that Starbucks is closing/has closed eight of its stores in the Detroit area, including three in the city itself. One of the ways that I was able to get a favorable comparison to Starbucks (and other big chains or big roasters) has been to capitalize on selling Fair Trade Certified (F/T) products.

Overall, though this article is good news. This will help the farmers (and that is really the point to the F/T certs). "Every small coffee roaster in Bareto or Santa Cruz is important to us, but the reality is a big retailer is like a faucet," said Anthony Marek, spokesman at TransFair USA. "And if you're a drip, that faucet can help tens of thousands of farmers across the world."

As F/T gets pushed out into Target and Walmart (and hotel chains?!?), independent coffee roasters and retailers are going to be put under even more pressure to find creative ways to differentiate their products and to increase their visibility, particularly in the current economy. Lynn Dornblaser, director-CPG trend insight at Mintel asserts that with the downturn in the economy, Americans are likely to be much more focused on their wallets, rather than third world countries. Savvy marketers for smaller shops can use this along with the things that make independent shops great in the first place: location, atmosphere, quality product, customer service.... to capitalize on the downturn.

Just don't rely on F/T as a differentiator.

Is your brand dead? Does imagery matter anymore? (Part I)

Yesterday I read an article on Bnet entitled "Kiss Your Brand Goodbye". This is a book review of Jonathan Salem Baskin’s new book “Branding Only Works on Cattle”.

The book is an interesting opinion on a larger trend in advertising and branding to deal with the new influence of integrated marketing (combined traditional advertising and web based marketing) and consumer mindset in the new millennium. His hypothesis is basically that a "brand" is an emotional association that marketers have created but consumers no longer buy into that association. They have become smarter and now look for product attributes that offer "actual" value rather than emotional brand attachment. This book is part of a trend to kill branding and in essence completely revise the advertising industry (some argue this has already happened). Well, I’ll throw my two cent hat into the ring (if you’ll allow me to mix sayings)...

First, brandchannel.com (article by Vincent Grimaldi) provides a pretty concise definition of branding:

Branding is the foundation of marketing and is inseparable from business strategy. It is therefore more than putting a label on a fancy product. Nowadays, a corporation, law firm, country, university, museum, hospital, celebrity, and even you in your career can be considered as a brand.
As such, a brand is a combination of attributes, communicated through a name, or a symbol, that influences a thought-process in the mind of an audience and creates value.

Ok, full disclosure, I have not yet read Baskin's book (I plan to), so I won’t be able to delve too deeply into his specific arguments. However, the article gives the background, and the book has several points that he claims prove that branding should be dead:

1. “There are no more trends, only moments” – shattered attention spans of consumers have killed the trends
2. “Subtlety is dead” because “people are more literal now” – our diversity means we no longer share as many common experiences. This means that “repetition risks becoming noise” and brand “recognition isn’t the same as brand relevance”
3. “Choice is real-time” – in other words, brand messaging doesn’t matter, and “forget about inspiring purchases through appealing to fantasy”
4. The “Virtual Experience is the new dreamscape” - social media “conversations are just the beginning”

As Michael Fitzgerald, the author of the bnet.com article points out, this is ahead of where we are in the market right now, and as such, I don’t actually agree with all his points.

I think of branding to be more like developing a friend – the brands are perceived to share consumers beliefs or interests, and consumers are likely to start the purchase process by looking at their "friends." Setting the attributes of a brand is an excellent way to set guidelines for the way a business will be marketed. For almost four years now, I’ve read about how the branding world is dying (Baskin’s book is just the latest shot across this bow), but then brands like Apple, Coke, Pepsi, BMW, Budweiser, Columbia, etc. remain stronger than ever.

In my mind, Baskin's argument only works if you don't believe consumers make image-driven purchases. Does just advertising product attributes or benefits really hold greater value than advertising a brand image? Frankly, I would argue that this isn’t the right question. We should be asking whether the current advertising model is working properly in the integrated social media millennium. Does the current media mix really work to advertise product benefits and image or is it all just becoming noise? I would argue that (as in the past) the two still can't be truly separated without disastrous results, but creating a truly integrated mix to reduce noise and target niches is the key to branding now.

Bike Sales Skyrocketing

I recently read on M-bike.org that bike sales are skyrocketing. This is good news being related from a survey from Bikes Belong. Additionally, there are some very interesting details in the survey results that certainly would help with the service department at bike shop.

First, the survey highlights from Bikes Belong:

The majority of retailers who responded said their sales of transportation-related bicycles, accessories, and service have increased in 2008 compared to 2007:

• 73% said they are selling more bikes.
• 84% said they are selling more accessories.
• 88% said they are selling more service.

Is this increase in sales because of high gas prices? Most retailers who we surveyed think so:

• 95% of shops said customers cited high gas prices as a reason for their transportation-related purchases.
• 80% of retailers said gas prices were helping them sell more bikes for transportation.
• 86% thought accessory sales were getting a boost.
• 89% said they were selling more service because of high gas prices.

Sounds like good news? Well, it is, but the most interesting tidbit from this survey I think comes from the service side. The survey also found that a vast majority of surveyed shops believed that 75% of summer business was from people bringing in old bikes to be repaired, vs. 25% who shopping for a new bike. One shop is quoted as saying this is up from 50% in 2007.

As a shop finds their service sales increasing because of increased use of older bikes for transportation, the customer service in the service department may have to adapt to a new type of customer. Specialized shops that are used to the lycra crowd will have to make sure that their service folks are ready to respectfully and profitably serve those who don't know a sprocket from a spoke and just want a bike that goes.

Here are three key customer service items that shops need to make sure they're addressing:

• Match recommendations to the rider - If your shop specializes in tri-bikes, but you are starting to see older single or three speed bikes, make sure your techs know what sort of parts are going to give the best value (cost vs. performance) to these types of riders (or partner with another shop that you can endorse for these folks).
• Watch your mouth - Most techs are ARDENT cycling fans (this is great - they wouldn't be very good at their jobs if they weren't!). They tend to be able to talk very specifically about which parts are better for bikes. But customers who are switching to bikes for transportation are unlikely to be able identify specific Shimano shifters, and may not even understand some basics (like the difference between one-piece cranks and higher quality three-piece cranks). Make sure that all techs are assessing and talking with customers at their level, not the tech's level. If you don't think they can, have someone else talk to the customers.
  
• Service follow-up - it astounds me how almost no bike shops do follow-up to make sure the service experience was satisfactory. I've only ever had one shop follow-up with me after service. Yes, this can take some substantial time in the high volume months, but even if you just follow up with new customers, it gives you a chance to make a real connection with customers.

How does your shop service rate? Don't know? Try having one of your friends mystery shop your service department.

Reference:
"Bikes Belong Survey Report: Impact of Gas Prices on Bike Sales" - August 2008 - Bikesbelong.org (pdf)

Brewing for Festivals

On July 30, 2008, the Michigan Senate passed a couple bills that change the rules for brewpubs in Michigan (slightly). Under the current (well, now old) rules, brewpubs could not take their beer to beer festivals because the Liquor Control Code does not permit companies with a brewpub license to sell their beer off premise. It has to be sold at the licensed property for consumption on or off premise. The new law allows a non-profit (such as Michigan Brewers Guild) to obtain a special license that will permit brewpubs to sell off premise at beer festivals.

This may seem like a somewhat obscure rule, but it should actually make a substantial difference to brew pubs when it comes to building their brand. It will have an impact in a couple different ways: first, it will give brewpubs easy access to a substantial and very targeted audience - passionate, craft beer drinkers; second, it gives brewpubs more control over their product (more on this in a moment); and finally, it should give more access to competitions for brewpubs as well.

Some of you may be thinking that you've seen brewpubs at festivals and won competitions. That's true. But, under the old rules, brewpubs had to have their beers contract brewed at a microbrewery (a different license) to participate in festivals. This means that their beer was not brewed on their equipment by their brewers. Basically, this took away control of their own product for festivals - imagine a winning beer that wasn't actually brewed by the brewer at the brewery! Crazy.

I did discover that there is another license that brewpubs could have purchased prior to this rule to be able sell product off premise:

"The LCC application form for a special license for on-premises consumption, however, indicates that beer may be purchased by the licensee from either a licensed wholesaler or a specially designated merchant (SDM) (a person licensed to sell beer and/or wine at retail for consumption off the licensed premises). Apparently, some brewpubs have an SDM license for the retail sale of beer in addition to their brewpub license."

I am not familar with this license, but my guess is that expensive (and of course, would require new packaging equipment to take advantage of it).

While retail sale is an entirely different animal than a brewpub, the access to beer festivals is a substantially improved law for those brewpubs looking to increase their profile with consumer advocates.

Space Beer!

From BrandWeek:

Earlier this year, Andy England was deposed for eight hours by the Department of Justice. The CMO of Coors Brewing was one of many top-level executives grilled about a variety of potential antitrust issues leading up to the merger of MolsonCoors and rival SABMiller.

Amid the proceedings, an unusual document came to light. The female justice slid a memo from one of England's senior technical people across the table. "Are you familiar with this? Do you remember receiving this e-mail?" England recalled her asking him.

The subject of the memo: "Space Beer." The ploy of sending yeast into orbit on a space shuttle and bringing it back to Earth was one of the literally thousands of ideas England and his team had come up with since he joined the company in February 2006.

"They were very amused. She had to know if we'd done 'space beer,'" he said. England's team never did get around to brewing any cosmic Coors.

I wonder if space beer tastes any different than earth beer. I'll bet not, but I also bet it would have been marketed and priced much, much, differently. Heck, I'd pay a premium for the novelty of it... once. I wonder how difficult it would be to get yeast into space and back so that I could brew a batch....