Posted on 05/28/2017 5:12:16 AM PDT by davikkm
My email to USAA:
Me May 26 / 10:24 AM
Sir:
I would like an explanation about the ongoing controversy of USAA’s apparent entry in the nonsensical world of political correctness.
It is my understanding, and I hope this is not the case, that USAA has pulled its advertisement in support of the Hannity show on FOX News Channel.
If this is the case I would like an explanation from senior management or his/her designated representative concerning USAA’s position on this issue.
I have loyal member of USAA since 1967 but it is never too late to change companies for all of my insurance, banking, and investment needs.
I hope USAA has not fallen prey to this boycott black mail threat the leftist communist political element in our country uses for political gain.
Believe me there are many active, former, retired, and family members that feel strongly about this and would cancel there so called “Member for Life” membership very quickly.
Sincerely,
USAA # XXXXXXXX
LTC XXXXX X. XXXXXXXX USA Ret
USAA Response:
USAA May 26 / 04:55 PM
Dear Colonel XXXXXXXX,
Our decision to stop advertising on the Hannity TV show was not the result of outside pressure. It is our policy to not advertise on any opinion-based programming. There was an error which led to our ads running during Hannity, and as soon as that was discovered, the error was corrected. Since then, we have done an additional review and removed ads from opinion-based news programs on other channels as well. We will continually review our ad placements to ensure we are consistent with our policy.
Thank you,
Roosevelt Showers
USAA
USAA means United Services Automobile Association and its affiliates.
Member Relations Advisor
Office of the CEO
(210) 531-8722, Extension 86071 or (800) 531-8722, Extension
Yes, in effect, every member is an owner and has their own subscriber account. USAA is essentially set up and operated as a co-op organization.
I am pretty much in agreement with you regarding their service, assistance and reasons for this monumental screw-up BUT have you noticed the recent ad profiling that emphasizes the life stories of minority members? As Seinfield would say, ‘not that there is anything wrong with that” but advertising emphasis that for the most part endeavors to impart both a commercial and PC message makes one question the credibility and purpose of both messages. This is particularly true for a company like USAA who really does not need to do advertising of this type, rather stick to a less “inclusive” type message that is more appealing to their military family base....or at least doesn’t piss that base totally off.
I only get car insurance from USAA.
Still, I have to make my point as much as the David Brock followers do.
That point is do not get involved in controversies that slander your customer base.
NOTHING less than a full apology will do. If what you say is true, and it’s not that I’m doubting you, why aren’t they out there yelling this to everyone right now? Their silence is implying they agree with the CAMPAGN to stop advertising on Sean Hannity specifically. If this is not the case, they need to be saying so from every roof top.
Michael Jackson was once asked why he didn’t help the Clinton campaign like other wealthy black athletes were. He replied, “Because Republicans buy sneakers, too.”
On Monday, I’m switching over my car insurance to Armed Forces Insurance, who does my homeowners policy. AFI is a real stalwart for helping GIs. I’ve been a customer for 30 years.
From the article: “USAA told ABC News that it aired ads on the three shows by accident, . . .”
Having been the client of a large advertising agency and having approved media plans and advertising buys for large corporations the “accident”, “mistake”, or “misunderstanding” excuse is not believable to me. USAA spends tens of millions of dollars on advertising (over $100 million annually by some accounts. No corporations makes expenditures of this size without several control points for management review and approval.
Advertising buy plans (media plans) are developed by an advertising agency and reviewed with management of the client company well in advance of the actual ad buy. The plans take into account company policy — if the company policy says no political ads, no political ads are presented by the advertising agency when it makes its recommendation. In addition companies often have special requests — they may ask for no advertising to be placed on a particular network or they may ask for extra weight on a particular show or against a particular demographic. The agency creates the plan and recommends a buy based on all of these criteria. Should the agency recommends a buy involving an exception to company policy and direction, that exception is called out clearly in the presentation of the plan and must be approved by company management.
When plans are presented to middle management at the client company, more than one member of management sits in the presentation so a “new employee” would not be able to approve the plan. The review is conducted program by program so anyone with knowledge of company policy is in a position to object should a show be recommended inconsistent with policy.
Once the plan is vetted by client company middle management, it is presented to executive management in detail. I’ve sat through many of these senior management review meetings and have found senior executive scrutinize the buys in details and ask many questions. After all, a significant amount of money is involved. It is not uncommon for the CEO or COO to approved the final plan, not just the executive responsible for marketing.
At the point the media plan is approved by the executives of the client company, there have been at least 3 review points — the advertising agency itself, company middle management, and company senior management. If the plan is changed after this point, those plan changes also have to be approved by company management. However, there is an additional check.
At the time the advertising is actually purchased, the agency will submit sign-offs for the buy itself. These sign offs are essentially purchase orders, an authorization to actually make the purchase of each individual program. These authorizations are not delegated to new or inexperienced employees as they involve the expenditure of millions of dollars. Minimally seasoned marketing managers or executives sign these authorizations. It is inconceivable the managers or executives signing the purchase authorizations have no knowledge of company policy.
I am a 30+ year member of USAA. I’m sad to say my personal experience as a senior marketing executive, and corporate COO, makes it difficult to believe the purchase of millions of dollars of advertising conflicting with company policy could have been a “mistake”.
The only instance I can think of in which an advertising buy can be a mistake is if USAA management has been negligent and not properly reviewed the buy. If it is the case millions of dollars of company money has been misappropriated, the executives responsible should be fired.
The explanation appears to be an obfuscation, a desperate attempt to kill a controversy without admitting the truth. To anyone with knowledge of the advertising buy process there are only two possible explanations:
1) USAA management’s explanation was correct, the buy was a mistake. If so, management is admitting its internal control processes are weak, being ignored, or begin circumvented and millions of dollars are being spend by the company without proper review and approval. In this instance, management is admitting incompetence and should be fired.
2) USAA management approved the ad buys on Hannity, Maddow and other shows. USAA managers approved the individual program authorizations at the time the media was purchased. Media Matters then put pressure on USAA management to pull the advertising it had approved and management caved to the pressure of outside social activists. When policyholder owners expressed outrage, the company floated the “mistake” explanation in an effort to quell the public relations crisis. If this is what really happened, the company’s management deliberately lied to its policyholder owners and should be fired.
At this point USAA management lacks credibility with many of its policyholder owners. Those owners are expressing outrage in social media and directly to management. Many are choosing to take their business to other companies. To restore credibility USAA needs to provide a detailed explanation of what exactly went wrong internally. If management succumbed to outside pressure, it needs to admit it. If an internal policy was violated there needs to be a detailed explanation of how the company control processes were violated and the managers involved must be fired for incompetence or deliberate violation of policy.
Note that as of 10:30 am Sunday morning, USAA management has not issued a communication to the member owners addressing a significant public relations crisis that has been discussed in the media for several days. If management should be trusted by the owners, why no communication?
I am disappointed with USAA and I am almost a 35 year member. My whole family is with USAA - my parents are half-century members.
The whole point of USAA was that it was a select group of low-risk members. The expansion, massive advertising push, and the big growth has done little (that I can see) to benefit the member/owners. It appears from the outside looking in that the growth is to benefit the board and executive staff - not the members. Our checks seem to have decreased every year and our costs have risen from my viewpoint. The insurance is great, but it is not as competitive as it used to be.
I am willing to give them the opportunity to explain what is going on and I am waiting. My family follows our principles in our business transactions. I don’t ask others to boycott or stop shopping anywhere, but we quietly have stopped doing so and I already think I can save far more than I receive back by switching insurance. The banking is a wash. USAA needs to slow down and realize that its uniqueness in the market is being destroyed by corporatism and much of the core membership is not very happy about it.
Canned response. I got the same thing word for word.
LOL, okay, why are you protecting MadCow’s advertisers?
Too late. Businesses need to just simply state they advertise based on demographic eyeballs, and stop caving to any political pressure. This entire incident confirms what I have been suspecting for years - USAA is going downhill. I am getting out while the getting is good. Moving my insurance and banking next week. They better pray they win their loyalty claims for app based deposit, or they are going under.
Cause they dont sell me any advertising so who cares
Thank you. I am a 26 yr USAA member and my Dad is a 52 yr member. We are both just apalled at this. We do EVERYTHING with this company. I don’t know what to do yet but I want an apology and a reversal along with some firings.
I sent them an email that said that I was looking for a new insurance company. I then said don’t try to tell me you don’t advertise on opinion shows.
They sent me an email that said that they don’t advertise on opinion shows.
I sent them another email that said that they were lying. I also said that I hoped that enough people leave USAA so that the person who sent me the email would get laid off. When the boss tells you to lie and you do it, you are responsible.
This company is doing everything wrong.
I sent them an email that said that I was looking for a new insurance company. I then said don’t try to tell me you don’t advertise on opinion shows.
They sent me an email that said that they don’t advertise on opinion shows.
I sent them another email that said that they were lying. I also said that I hoped that enough people leave USAA so that the person who sent me the email would get laid off. When the boss tells you to lie and you do it, you are responsible.
This company is doing everything wrong.
I have noticed this, too. I would like to see ads that are NOT PC. Being representative of their customer base is fine, but pandering is not.
Pretty sure the current CEO is black. I’m fine with that if he is a competent businessman who runs the company for the benefit of its members - active military and vets. I’m not fine with that if he is a token black (like 0vomit), runs the company for the benefit of “his people”, and/or uses the company as a vehicle for lining his own pockets.
For me it started quite a few years ago when they did away with their Prime Savings account that gave a much higher savings interest rate than other banks.
They no longer do one on one investment counseling for my investments. It is all online or over the phone.
Little things like Navy Federal Credit Union having almost twice the interest rates on their certificates and 1 1/2% on their Cash Rewards Visa when USAA is only 1%. As I said just little things. Navy Fed has great locations here in San Diego and USAA has none anywhere.
More than a retail store chain like Target or a food manufacturer like Kellogg's, USAA is vulnerable to a quick and painful penalty from a mass boycott by conservative consumers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.