Two and a Half (minus) Men

Two and a Half (minus) Men

The news is buzzing about the possible end of the television show, Two and a Half Men.

Looking at the situation from purely a strategic perspective, one has to wonder what went wrong? Sure TV shows, like products, have a lifecycle but it didn't appear that the show had progressed to the exit strategy stage as of yet. Two and a Half has been a top-rated show featuring Charlie Harper, a man successful in the entertainment business who earns lots of money, drinks and likes his women. Sound familiar? People watch the show and it is (was) one of CBS's top shows - a proven model for success.

One of the stars of the show, Charlie Sheen, according to the media, lives a similar lifestyle in real life, but much to the dislike of some executives. The media is reporting that Charlie does not have a "morals clause" in his contract, meaning any activities he pursues would not be a violation of his contract.

In business, this type of branding would be great. Consistency between the highly successful character that everyone watches and the real life character might even add value to the business and the brand. Sheen gets paid millions to portray a lifestyle on TV and then criticized for living a similar lifestyle. I hear that no major advertisers have left the show. Perhaps CBS should be supporting Charlie and hope that he makes the news. It might actually draw more viewers to the show. Remember the old PR adage, I don't care what they say as long as they spell my name right?

Some might say Sheen's alleged behavior can be bad for business. A star might get drunk or high, hurt someone, be arrested or even get hurt and miss a few weeks of taping. Ok, I agree. But knowing that those risks exist at the beginning of a season, executives should account for that in its timeline and account for it in its risk assessment and contingency budget.

One media report indicated that Two and a Half Men is a billion dollar business. Surely a cost-benefit analysis would show a delayed taping schedule of a few weeks would not be that detrimental when looking at the overall strategic picture. It is hard to believe that management did not prepare for the recent events and actually bring in PR to mitigate the risk or even capitalize on the events. Instead of consistent marketing and branding of the two Charlie's, it appears we may see a going out of business sign.

That's too bad. I guess we will all be minus two and a half.

Strategic Marketing

During a recent discussion with a Doctor of Optometry, the doctor indicated that he would like to increase the number of patients without dramatically increasing his marketing budget. It seems the economic downturn has caused an approximate 40% attrition rate to his practice.

I asked the doctor if he accepted insurance from patients and he stated that he did, but the paperwork and coding for each one was a nightmare. {My impression was that he couldn’t live without the insurance companies and was having trouble living with them.} I then asked if his office tracked the number of people who called asking if the practice accepted their insurance. He indicated that it did not. I suggested that he have his office staff track the number of requests for insurance coverage for a period of time and then concentrate on learning those systems while decreasing the amount of patients from the smaller insurance companies that were so time consuming.

I told the doctor that this study would not cost his office anything in terms of the market study and he would be able to maximum his learning of the coding system and group similar paperwork together while serving potential customers that he is currently turning away. Surprisingly, the office staff for the practice had not thought about tracking the prospective calls that come in to the office.

Lessons Learned: Sometimes, increasing your customer base does not have to cost that much more money. Think about what you are not offering, in relation to what you are offering. Track and measure everything.