Comcast Drops the Ball in Launch of XFinity

Comcast did not show a lot of marketing prowess in its recent launch of its new Xfinity brand. Instead of having a launch plan that framed understanding and expectation of Xfinity, the announcement was made during a conference call with financial analysts. Letting the investor relations folks handle brand announcements is a new strategy, but it is not one that I would recommend to other companies.

Comcast should not be faulted for developing the Xfinity brand. It is a cable company and the Comcast name is saddled with all of the attributes of a cable company, none of which are typically positive, progressive, or exciting. This is not only true for Comcast, but also for Time Warner and other cable companies. Cable companies are thought of as public utilities--pipes that bring other people's talents into ones home.

Comcast is competing head-on with Verizon and its high-speed Fios. While Verizon does not develop its own technology, it is perceived to be far ahead of Comcast in technological prowess, principally due to its association with high-tech devices such a smart phones. Verizon has been battling AT&T on 3G network coverage, and that also has made it seem like a technology leader, at least in comparison with Comcast.

So, Comcast looked at its attributes and the attributes of Verizon's Fios, and determined that it needed a new brand. Xfinity was a combination of two ideas that had been at play at Comcast for some time. It had been talking about cross-platforms and also about its infinite capabilities in the entertainment and connectivity space. By combining the two ideas, Xfinity was born. This was to be the brand for Comcast's here-to-fore "triple play" of cable, computer, telephone--matching Verizon in terms of speed, security and price.

I used to work for a CEO who used to say that "execution is 90% of the determination of success". So, the strategy behind Xfinity was good; the execution was not so good. In fact, really poor.

Xfinity gave Comcast the chance to reframe the discussion and expectations of customers, to talk about the new Comcast--the one focused on customer service and the one poised to buy NBC Universal. It could talk about its high-speed competition to Fios, what it was doing in the telecom and wireless spaces, etc., etc.

Comcast blew it big time. When one doesn't frame the brand or discussion about the brand, it allows others, primarily competitors, to frame the discussion. Customers now believe that Comcast is changing its name to Xfinity, which it is not; Verizon is running ads making fun of the change as being nothing more than "window dressing" and also suggesting that Comcast has changed its name.

In the meantime, the Xfinity ads that Comcast started to run after the "non-announcement announcement" look very much like ads that were supposed to run as teasers before the announcement. So, there were no teasers, no public relations build-up with the press, not heightened sense of excitement, no framing of technology discussions about fiber optics (Verizon) against high speed alternatives from Comcast. There was no discussion of how Xfinity will be Fios without the dirty work of tearing up property to bring fiber optics to the home. All of these opportunities were lost and now the discussion is being framed by those who either dislike Comcast or by its competitors. Companies have held successful press conferences for brands with less vitality and possibility than Xfinity.

I guess trying to get a company like Comcast to think and act like a major marketing company will take some time. It seems like a Spanish procession--one step forward, two steps back. In its customer service activities, Comcast has taken a major step forward. With the Xfinity announcement, Comcast took at least two steps back.