Who Gets Runners, Better?

A while back, I posted two spots aimed at people who run. One for Nike+. One for New Balance. I left the request fairly open-ended, asking people to let me know what they liked or didn’t like about each, or to compare and contrast them. I especially wanted to hear from people who run.

I did this because I am not a runner, nor do I run. There is no love/hate relationship for me with running. It’s all hate. When someone asks me if I run, I like to use a phrase a friend of mine says when asked the same question, “I only run when chased.”

Why am I telling you this? Because I want to be clear from the start that with me not being a runner, I couldn’t tell you if either of the commercials in question speak to a runner. And that’s why I asked the question I did. With that, here’s what I learned from those of you who responded both in the comments of the post and via Twitter with a few of my own thoughts/hypotheses thrown in...

Real runners actually do have a love/hate relationship with running. There are days when they just don’t want to do it, but they do anyway because they know that afterwards, they’ll feel better for it. Real runners are intrinsically motivated. They don’t run to lose weight or to get in shape for another sport or to stay trim. They don’t run to be a part of a “running community.” They run for themselves. They run to run.

Real runners don’t need something telling them in their ear how far they’ve gone or how much time they have left until they’re done. In fact, they’d rather not have anything to listen to other than the sound of their feet hitting the ground beneath them, their breath hitting the air and the thoughts running through their mind. For real runners, running is personal. New Balance gets this. And while their execution may fall a little flat for some real runners, the idea still resonates.

Nike+ on the other hand doesn’t speak to the real runner. Nike+ speaks to the person who runs, but not because they love running. The person who uses Nike+, from what I can ascertain via the feedback on the commercials, is doing it for some other reason. Possibly to get back in shape. Or to lose five pounds. Or to stay conditioned for another sport. Or maybe to get in some daily exercise in leu of going to the gym.

Therefore, the Nike+ user is more likely to be extrinsically motivated. There is no love/hate relationship with running. It’s mostly hate. This person runs as a means to an end, not because they love running. Because of this, they need extra motivation. They need to feel like they’re part of a larger community to be accountable to. They need music to help them keep a pace and not think about how much they hate what they’re doing at the moment. They need a voice telling them they only have a little bit further to go, only a few more minutes, until the self-inflicted torture ends.

The Nike+ ad follows in the footsteps of Nike’s historical approach to advertising, which is to speak to the inner-athlete in people who aspire to be more/do more than they are currently. By presenting Nike+ in a way that makes it feel like it’s for real runners and is a way of bringing real runners together, they speak to the masses who aspire to be more/do more and are running as a way to achieve this. Real runners look at this ad and scoff. But those who run for some purpose other than for a love of running look at it and say, “I want to be a part of that.” Nike+ makes it easier for the person who runs for external reasons stay with it.

So, there you have it. That’s my take, based on what a few of you told me. New Balance is going after a niche - runners. Nike+ is hitting the masses outside of that niche - people who run. Two different brands/products for two different types of people who run. What do you think? Did I come close? Or did I miss the mark? Runners, what do you have to say?

Comments

[Brian Morrissey]

For a non-runner, I think you're spot on. One of the trends Nike has noticed is that we're in a second running boom. The first was in the 1970s, ignited by Frank Shorter's electric performance at the Olympics in 1976. That boom was about going out there and killing. It was mustaches, 200-mile weeks, under-3 hours or you weren't doing it. The second running boom was ignited by a very different athlete: Oprah. She chugged through the Marine Corps Marathon in mid-1990s, proving anyone can run, even what's thought of the ultimate distance. Races nowadays are much slower, more walkers and charity runners. For the fat head of the runners, it's about fitness and participation. The Nike+ system is designed for this. "Real" runners don't listen to music when they run, at least in my experience. The people that do are those on the treadmills in gyms. There's nothing wrong with that -- there are more of them, after all -- but they're not the hard-core runners. Look at Runners World. It's nearly unrecognizable to competitive runners. It's gone from a focusing on running to lifestyles, with the inevitable "five surefire ways to great abs" features recycled again and again. It has sections like "the Penguin," which celebrate not pushing yourself and a column b the bete noire of "real" runners: Jeff Galloway, the vocal proponent of the run-walk method.

But that's the problem with mass media and mass advertising: it doesn't speak to our diversity, right? Even a niche like runners is too varied for one publication or ad campaign to speak to in an authentic way.

[etalerman]

You nailed it for me Paul. I run because I run and because rhythm and air and nature all collide in meditation for me. New Balance does get that. Nike never has. I agree with you. New Balance has long catered to runners and Nike has always appealed to those who aspire.

[John Gibbard]

Interesting and timely post. I bought a Nike+ device this weekend for myself and my wife. I bought the shoes for her and hacked my existing Asics to take the sensor.

I used to run a fair bit. My wife runs alot. I haven't run for ages and having seen someone at work demo the online interface I loved the idea of having my runs stored/analysable. My maths is rubbish and I can never work out how far I've run, what my pace is etc. etc. I use a polar HR monitor and wanted the speed information. Interestingly I'd never listened to music when I'd run outside and that's an element of Nike+ I'm not keen on but their new armband makes that irrelevant.

I don't like the approach that one is for runners and one is for people who aspire to run. I'm an enthusiastic runner who needed a kick up the ass to get back into it. I don't want to be a slave to Nike in particular but the integration with iPod and the good User Interface of their site sucked me in. I'm glad I can use my Asics though as Nike shoes don't feel 'pro' to me.

The new balance ad reminds me of something an athlete once said to me about only noticing the drains, gutter, paving slabs and yellow lines on his runs because he's always looking down, singularly focussed on his footfall. That's the reality of running. The Nike ad makes me realise why I want to run, because I want to be better, leaner, fitter and stronger than I am. That's aspiration against New Balance's religious dedication.

[gareth]

Good post Paul. Think it's all about what the role of communications /marketing was. I think Nike+ is about getting more people to run (ie grow the category) while New Balance is about getting existing runners to choose/and keep existing New Balance owners loyal. Hence, very different bits of work.

[Hella sound]

Paul, frankly, I call BS.

I think a lot of what you're saying is spot on, but I have always and will forever be burned by this idea of a "real" anything. Person X is not a real musician. Person Y isn't a real artist. Person Z isn't a real runner.

If we excluded all non-Real Musicians, we would never have had Nirvana. An Only Real Artists world would devoid of Jackson Pollack and maybe even Salvador Dali.

It's a weak, sophomoric categorization.

Yes, my company (Hella Sound) makes music for runners specifically. I created the company from my own personal interest in music that motivates me while I run.

So am I not a "real" runner? I may never be an elite runner--something you can quantify; or I'll never be something you could call a "purist"; but as long as I'm running, I'm real enough.

[Lisa de Speville]

I have gadgets (I'm a Gear Editor for a running magazine) but I don't often play with them.

Runners do fall into two main groups (and various sub-categories with different motivations); those who run because it is their life and love and and those who participate for health and fitness reasons. Some people are internally motivated (usually the former group) and others need external motivation (usually the latter group). External motivation can come in the form of a running buddy, running group or gadgets.

Some take up running for a short period to achieve a specific goal, like running one of the major city marathons (New York, London etc).

Running's growth has boomed on the participation side with a deluge of run/walk participants over the shorter 5km and 10km distances.

The New Balance ad speaks to me. It relates to juggling life committments (work, family, time) and running, which is a commitment to yourself. Nike ad is pretty and I get the concept but doesn't have the same kick.

[marko bon]

It's lovely to see a previous post, an open question, get distilled back into your take on the issue. I dig that very much.

@ HellaSound -- I think the term "real" is being used here as a distinction between "intrinsic" vs "extrinsic," and as a marketer it helps to bring some distinctions to your audience. It's hardly worth getting into a semantic debate over the meaning of "real" ;)

And most importantly -- your post turned my initial take on the two ads into a good personal lesson: I'm not a real runner -- and those extrinsic characteristics in the Nike spot are what appealed to me, to get me out the door. A handy realization.

[paul isakson]

Thank you all for the comments.

Brian - agree about mass media. The costs are too high to be laser-focused in most circumstances. Even on TV where you have specific/"fragmented" channels. Comedy Central is all about comedy, but I definitely don't find everything that they air funny.

etalerman - thank you for the additional insights and support of the thoughts.

John - very interesting to hear that you "hacked" your Asics. Maybe there's a "hijacking" opportunity for another shoe company out there to integrate the Nike+ system?

Given your comment and HellaSound's, I think the term "real" was a poor choice of words. What it really comes down to is New Balance is trying to reach people who run for no other reason than that they love to run. They are passionate about running and are purists. Nike is trying to reach people who run or want to run for some other reason. It's aout the benefits of running, but not about running itself. Given your statement of, "The Nike ad makes me realise why I want to run, because I want to be better, leaner, fitter and stronger than I am," you fall into the second camp. There's nothing wrong with being in either camp. It's just that the two brands are trying to reach two different types of people who run.

gareth - absolutely agree. Nike+ encourages more people to get out and run. NB wants the passionate runner to pick them over Asics, Brooks, Saucony, etc.

HellaSound - As I said a couple comments above, "real" was possibly a poor choice of language in hindsight. I didn't take time to sort out the words as much as I maybe should have. The comparisons you're making though have links to what I was discerning from some of the people who run for a love of running and nothing else.

To some art purists, what Pollack did isn't art. To some music purists, what Nirvana did isn't music (and how many times have we heard this argument about rap/hip-hop?). To some running purists, those who run for reasons other than an absolute love of running maybe aren't runners (some would call them joggers).

But if I look at your examples with what I was intending to communicate by "real," then Pollack is a real artist and Nirvana were real musicians. They both did what they did because they had passion for it, even though their version of it was a bit different than what others' versions were. (Which you can get away with easier in the arts as it is a bit more subjective.)

So for running/runners, it doesn't matter how good/fast you are. All that matters for a "real" runner is that you run for no other reason than that you love running. Again, probably poor choice of words and thanks for calling me out for not being more careful with my language.

Lisa - thank you for taking time to share the additional insights and thoughts. Very helpful and interesting to hear from someone who lives in the running world.

Marko - thanks for helping to clarify what I was intending to communicate by "real." Also thanks for letting me know that you liked this kind of post/series of posts. It was a test of sorts for me as I've not done it before. Glad you enjoyed it.

[Shoneequah]

Paul - great post. I love that you surveyed people's feelings on the topic via Twitter. It does have purpose! Kidding...

I have to admit, I'm definitely in a hate relationship with running currently. Once upon a time we were good friends but things sort of fell apart. I sincerely hope we can reconcile some day but I'm not sure it's going to work out. Point of this rambling - do you think people migrate back and forth over time? Right now, I'm probably a Nike+ gal but I hope that someday I can be a New Balance runner.

-M

[Marc Rapp]

Game > Fame

A classic from Nike.

[Katie]

I have to completely disagree with your assessment of the New Balance commercial only being for real runners. I am not a real runner, I run a few times a week, mostly to keep in shape, and I HATE it. But I LOVE how it makes me feel later in the day and about myself, my appearance, my accomplishment. The work day seems less challenging after you've already put 4 miles on your legs in the morning...especially if it sucked. The great thing about the New Balance one is it speaks to different runners in different ways. The real runner loves the run, hates the injuries, or sometimes the sacrifice required. The runner who runs to stay in shape, hates the run, loves the effect. That's what New Balance gets. It doesn't matter how much you run, or why you run...there's always a balance there.

[anna]

That's an interesting analysis--I hadn't thought about it this way before.

Maybe because I don't really call myself a runner, even though I guess I am, the Nike ads sometimes have made me wonder if I'm missing out/overlooking some community of the people or something like that, as if maybe that is how "real" runners run--I'm sort of glad to read this and see that it's not true.

I mean, I run because I don't think I could function without it. But I'm still stupidly self-conscious about it because nobody in my family is athletic--there's an uncle who once in awhile watches college football--and it's hard to explain to people who don't already love it and who tell you you're crazy.

But it makes me happy just thinking about it, even on days when I know it's going to be cold and wet and so I sleep in my track pants so that I won't have to shiver out of my pajamas in the morning, I'll just have to grab my shoes and *go*.

so thanks for giving me a new way to think about it. :)