By simon | 23 November
Well, first, a few things the Clem7 tunnel did right from a marketing point of view:
1. They let everyone walk through it. Nice touch and from an experiential marketing point of view, a great way to engage in a new engineering structure. Tunnel nerds and the like, loved it. The 'run' bit was a bit worse. People almost died in it because they couldn't get water etc.
2. The name - Clem7 tunnel - is catchy. It feels a bit superheroy. If that's a word. Which its not.
But where it went wrong.
1. Introductory discount offers on tunnels. Hmmm. So now I can go through the Clem7 tunnel at $2, and then later I'm going to be paying $4.30? That tends to backfire when you realise that the benefit is not THAT great. I've experience it cheap and now, for added payment, I'm getting nothing else. Introductory discounts work best when the product is super duper amazing and a consumer can't survive without it. Not for tunnels. Charge a price and stick with it.
2. The creative advertising for the Clem7 tunnel was woeful. And here's why. It was a picture of a helicopter in a tunnel with the copy 'fly through the tunnel.' Or something like that. It was so un-memorable I forget.
What do you think of when you look at the image of a helicopter in a tunnel? Well, for starters, helicopters aren't meant to be in tunnels. They end up in tunnels in only a few circumstances - disaster movies or Bruce Willis movies. And generally things are exploding at that point. And people are dying.
So we're using an image subconsciously linked to death and destruction to promote getting someone into the Clem7 Tunnel tunnel? Ahhh yeah. See the issue here?
There are many, many reasons why the Clem7 tunnel failed and most of them can be found here. But the wisdom in the creative and discounting has to be questioned too.
Either way, I suspect that in 10 years time the Clem7 tunnel will be making someone, somewhere a fortune and we'll have forgotten all about these issues; just no helicopters in tunnels please?
Submitted by Bruce Rillis (not verified) on Wed, 08/12/2010 - 10:23am.
They should have had Bruce Willis opening the tunnel. That would have generated some good publicity. Plus if something went wrong he could have saved the day.
Submitted by Yolande (not verified) on Tue, 23/11/2010 - 1:50pm.
I totally agree, helicopter in a tunnel, give me a break. I instantly thought of Bruce Willis as well, especially in die hard 3, when all the water comes through and Bruce gets out just in the nick of time, not a good relation to have.
It's a little to clostraphobic in that tunnel for me and I'm sick of paying for tolls, especially if it takes me the same time to go the original way.
This tunnel doesn't provide enough information as to where your going to get off at (no land marks). So if you make a mistake, whoops, there goes more traffic on the original roads, which totally defeats the purpose.
Oh well, I'm sure the gov don't care since we've all paid for it anyway.
Submitted by Unhappy Jan (not verified) on Tue, 23/11/2010 - 11:00am.
It's been completely mis-represented and misleading if you ask me.
I wanted to drive as fast as a helicopter but yet I get a fine.
So them I rang to enquire about renting a helicopter, but it seems they have a problem with their phone system when I asked to be put through to 'chopper hire', it dropped out.
And I think lasers would help just for coolness factor alone. Make it like a theme park ride with monsters that jump out of cupboards and I'll pay $4.30.
Submitted by Larry (not verified) on Tue, 23/11/2010 - 10:21am.
I agree with the payment, they should have made a set price! When the price was $2 it freed up Brisbane roads and now I find it was the same as if the tunnel wasn't there. Your posted reminded me of when Bruce Willis drove his car into the helicopter :D
Post new comment