Putting Lipstick on the Pig
Before my current job, I spent close to 10 years at a major brokerage house on Wall Street. My early years were during the dot.com bubble and the subsequent fall out.
Around 2002, there was a commercial that hit the airwaves that alluded to unethical practices by many of the top brokerage firms during the IPO craze, selling companies with little or no fundamentals in order to fill the ravenous need by investors to catch the next internet superstar.
Around 2002, there was a commercial that hit the airwaves that alluded to unethical practices by many of the top brokerage firms during the IPO craze, selling companies with little or no fundamentals in order to fill the ravenous need by investors to catch the next internet superstar.
The commercial was by direct online broker Schwab and it focused on a room full of brokers preparing for the next selling campaign. In it they admit the lack of fundamentals of the subject of their sale, but are more motivated by selling incentives etc. The rallying cry to the "pretend" sales force was “Let’s put some lipstick on this pig!” and it became an instant classic. Publically, brokerages were outraged at what the commercial did to ridicule investment professionals and how it eroded investor trust. Privately the line became the inside joke of almost every campaign in the foreseeable future. You know when I started hearing that joke again used regularly? When CDOs became the product du jour. I kid you not.
Palin’s “Pitbull vs. Hockey Mom” brought back memories of this line, as it should have any person who was on or dealt with Wall Street during the turn of the century. I wondered how quickly the comparison would come up. But it didn’t. Strange. It seemed so very obvious – animals with lipstick? Com’on guys…nobody? Not even the great John Stuart? Wow.
The media is still licking it's wounds from the "pitbull's" attacks and her handler's accusations. They are being overly careful with their comparison so as not to appear sexist or unfair, even if that means not stating the obvious.
Thank goodness for bloggers, eh? Before I go on, for P.C.'s sake, let me state early on that this is not about Palin the woman. This is about the McCain/Palin the ticket, and the new “Maverick” mantra. Is this newly re jiggered campaign of McCain/Palin simply more lipstick on the pig of a campaign being run by the Republicans? From what I can gather, nothing has changed. Why has the campaign gotten such a bump? "Service" was boring and "Country First" was pretty dull, but the "Maverick" team? Now there is some smart marketing. Change the packaging to sell the product that didn’t sell before – the essence of the "lipsticked pig."
Even the new team seems like more of the old team. The Vice Presidential nominee is a former governor with no national or international experience, who comes from oil country, is a disciple of the Christian conservative right and has a great smirk and “awe shucks” demeanor. Doesn’t this sound a lot like George W circa 2000? What’s the difference here? Lipstick?
And the platform – has that changed at all? There seems to be no change of policy concerning Iraq, taxes, choice, immigration, healthcare or the economy, other than maybe to go more towards the right. This is the same platform that this country is now trying to dig itself out from. How has this escaped the minds of so many people who are now so eager to support the people in power who are responsible for the last 8 years?
But just like during the tech bubble, most people are not paying attention to fundamentals. The fault of the overexuberance of the internet bubble lies with both the stock peddlers as well as the greed of the individual investor. I remember brokers telling me that despite clients having a low risk tolerance assessment when opening accounts, if their portfolios didn’t perform in the double digits, the clients would transfer their money to brokers who promised he/she would. It was impossible to convince clients that fundamentals were more important than comparing returns at the country club.
Republicans are good history students. That, and they expect very little of people. They believe, rather, they are relying on the belief that people don’t listen to fundamentals, that they would rather “feel connected” to a candidate than pay attention to policy. Based on the recent bump in poll numbers - could they be right?
Before the convention, McCain was the keeper of a lonely and unwanted pig. Now with this new, lipsticked GOP ticket, it seems the Republicans have gotten more people to ignore the smell.
Comments