Green Day's Marketing & Promotional Efforts

[Lenny]

I made this thread to discuss GD's marketing and promotional efforts for FOAMF as we have discussed in other threads and at times got a bit off topic with it. 

What do you guys think about their efforts in promoting their new music this time around? Do you feel like they're leaning more on promoting a legacy act rather than an artist with new music? 

What's your view on the partnerships they've made over the last few months? What do you think about the rock/alternative market as a whole and how does it affect the band? 

[DookieLukie]

Heavy on the legacy act side.

[Lenny]

4 minutes ago, DookieLukie said:

Heavy on the legacy act side.

Yeah I agree. I will say they really pushed FOAMF as a lone single so far but there's been very little talk of the album as a whole and very little interest from both interviewers and the band about the new album. I think if the slam dunk into the rock hall didn't happen it may have been a different story. I think we're due for a new single as well. 

Foamf isn't a horrible song but it's just not the best representation of Green Day or what this album was described as. I think it was definitely worth pushing as a single but there's gotta be something that's more traditional Green Day that can be released vs foamf or fra. 

The challenge for the band is how large their market is. All of us want something different. The one thing American Idiot did well was have a wide range of different singles. I'm typically one for trying new things but that formula may be one worth revisiting. 

 

[pacejunkie punk]

I think they’re straddling that line of being a legacy act versus current artist and are trying to figure out how to use the former to benefit the latter without being perceived as a legacy act. It’s a tricky balancing act, but so far I like what they’ve done. Acknowledging the history of Dookie but playing it alongside the new stuff reminds audiences of who they are and hopefully shows them they’re still at it. Other than that the fact that their promotional appearances (award shows, talk shows, etc) and tie-ins with sports and gaming is something they’ve done for years now and the fact that they haven’t changed it seems like an effort to remain current and not shift to legacy status. A legacy thing to do would be to slow down, to do only retrospective tours and release their memoirs. They’re not there yet, as long as many of their fans are still years and decades younger than they are and they continue to focus on new music.

[Lenny]

3 hours ago, pacejunkie punk said:

I think they’re straddling that line of being a legacy act versus current artist and are trying to figure out how to use the former to benefit the latter without being perceived as a legacy act.

Their best years are behind them but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's over so I agree. I think their new marketing vs what was done for Rev Rad is a step forward. They've had good placement and promotion. I think they lack a specific target but they appeal to a really wide range of different individuals. They've fit in well in the awards shows performances (minus the game awards) but the issue that still has a question mark is the product itself. 

The marketing efforts have been aggressive but how are they being perceived? 

A really short tracklist with a strange album cover.. kind of a shot in the foot in a way. We don't know what the other 8 songs are like or what type of next single may be ready for launch. As of right now @DookieLukie is right as they fall more into a legacy act thing. They're at awards shows playing a new song and one off dookie but they aren't receiving any awards and haven't been nominated for a decent award for a long time. The last qualifying accolade is the rock hall induction. 

I feel like Rev Rad and even the beginning of this era are resting on this a tad too much. They're like a stanley cup team coming back next season and starting slow still on the high of last year's win. Many times that has led teams to downward spiral for years where they don't even see a playoff game. I think they can grow the older part of their audience this way with little to no effrort but anyone younger than 30 doesn't really care and they'll be held to what do you have to say for right now? 

They obviously don't do this for awards but it just seems like 21cb right now was the top of the mountain for them. They set themselves with an extremely high bar and standard for us to hold them to. I understand coming around going back to basics and having fun but we're 3 albums in on that now. They put their heart and soul into these songs I'm not questioning the effort but I would say the risk of putting out simple songs is often getting a simple result. 

 

[pacejunkie punk]

OTOH short songs are what he feels the culture wants right now and what streaming encourages. It’s certainly what Billie is feeling, his ADHD phone junkie behavior supports it and in that way it’s again relatable because I feel it too. Everything is short attention span these days. Once again he’s holding a mirror up to the culture whether we like what we see or not. 

[Lenny]

7 minutes ago, pacejunkie punk said:

OTOH short songs are what he feels the culture wants right now and what streaming encourages. It’s certainly what Billie is feeling, his ADHD phone junkie behavior supports it and in that way it’s again relatable because I feel it too. Everything is short attention span these days. Once again he’s holding a mirror up to the culture whether we like what we see or not. 

Yeah for sure but we haven't seen 8 of the songs yet. Foamf has very mixed reception but may be the oddball of the entire album. FRA hasn't really been received well at all. One thing that worries me that this strategy of getting out to the most people as possible could also be a bad play. Just continually irritate people with this song they dislike over and over. U2 seems to have a knack for that type of thing just to put it into perspective. I think the strategy they're trying now worked with 21cb and AI but there was quality there that was considered objectively true. 

Short songs are why GD are here it's a part of punk subculture as well. One of my favourite short songs ever is Spray Paint by Black Flag. Its quick, energetic and to the point. Green Day had that early on in the 90s and it worked for them then. At this time it doesn't seem to be as effective for them. I think they're not applying the experience they gained from AI and 21cb to these shorter songs here. What happened to all the breakdowns they used to have in those short songs? The majority of the songs lately have had just a straight forward approach. 

The approach to me seems kinda strange, we'll just lower the song by a minute then it won't feel as drawn out. What about reworking it and making 3 minutes feel like 1 minute? What about a proper album cover? Even the album cover screams legacy act. 

[pacejunkie punk]

6 minutes ago, Sheenius said:

Yeah for sure but we haven't seen 8 of the songs yet. Foamf has very mixed reception but may be the oddball of the entire album. FRA hasn't really been received well at all. One thing that worries me that this strategy of getting out to the most people as possible could also be a bad play. Just continually irritate people with this song they dislike over and over. U2 seems to have a knack for that type of thing just to put it into perspective. I think the strategy they're trying now worked with 21cb and AI but there was quality there that was considered objectively true. 

Short songs are why GD are here it's a part of punk subculture as well. One of my favourite short songs ever is Spray Paint by Black Flag. Its quick, energetic and to the point. Green Day had that early on in the 90s and it worked for them then. At this time it doesn't seem to be as effective for them. I think they're not applying the experience they gained from AI and 21cb to these shorter songs here. What happened to all the breakdowns they used to have in those short songs? The majority of the songs lately have had just a straight forward approach. 

The approach to me seems kinda strange, we'll just lower the song by a minute then it won't feel as drawn out. What about reworking it and making 3 minutes feel like 1 minute? What about a proper album cover? Even the album cover screams legacy act. 

See to me the album cover screams dank memes and tiktok, not legacy act at all

[Lenny]

4 hours ago, pacejunkie punk said:

See to me the album cover screams dank memes and tiktok, not legacy act at all

i still have no clue what tik tok is 😂 What bands have album covers that reference their older album's artwork? Is this more common than I think? Only one I can really think of is Screeching Weasel's First World Manifesto being very similar to BoogadaBoogadaBoogada. 

Prior to the album a lot of us here put focus on them going for an aggressive promotional strategy. That's in place now but it's success is going to rely on product. It seems like the product is a bundle of 10 new songs, a 2019 monsters of rock tour and them celebrating Dookie's anniversary. It makes me concerned for the album cause it seems more like here's 10 songs btw check out our tour where we play 1 new song and ride all the old tunes. 

I am anticipating that this won't be a standard GD run with an album drop and 2 world tour legs. I have a feeling they'll stick around for a while and go right into the next album similar to a Dookie-Insomniac release schedule. What I like about that is they'll be around rocking the houses around the world for longer but they're due for another classic single. Does anyone think Foamf will be on the setlist once we move onto the next album? fra hasn't even made a setlist in it's own era.

To conclude it would be nice if they followed their 90's strategy a bit more by playing on more night shows. I feel like we're 30 days away from foamf being on Ellen Degeneres or something. 

 

[The Grohl]

I think their marketing strategy is all right for this album. I just wish there were more of it. I agree that they're riding that balance between legacy act and staying relevant and I think they're doing a good job with it. I can see why some people would think that them appearing on the Game Awards or Billie doing interviews with Billie Eilish makes it seem like they're trying too hard. I see it as they're trying to get exposed to a new audience. And there's nothing wrong that. I actually don't mind that they've been playing one songs from Dookie followed by FOA. It feels like they're reminding people of the great work they've done and then saying well if you like that, hear what we have coming. I was just hoping we'd get more TV appearances, interviews, etc at this point.

[UNICORN VOMIT]

I guess they will promote downunder when the album is released (not FOAM) the new album😋 & tour dates are set....

[Beerjeezus]

They're trying to balance their legacy with the new stuff and there's nothing wrong with that. Some efforts are okay others look like trying too hard (tik tok). Overall I'd say they're doing a good job making sure the general public notices them but I'm not sure how many fans are enjoying it too (there's a reason why so many of us are freaking out over panicland).

[Lenny]

On 12/13/2019 at 9:24 PM, kaylubd said:

I can see why some people would think that them appearing on the Game Awards or Billie doing interviews with Billie Eilish makes it seem like they're trying too hard. I see it as they're trying to get exposed to a new audience. And there's nothing wrong that. I actually don't mind that they've been playing one songs from Dookie followed by FOA. It feels like they're reminding people of the great work they've done and then saying well if you like that, hear what we have coming. I was just hoping we'd get more TV appearances, interviews, etc at this point.

I don't mind the tie in with the pop stars. I think the ones they've picked are the best 2 possible. They fit in well with Billie Eilish and Post Malone. Both them are also very different than their peers in the music industry. I think it will help to restore some of the respect that's been lost for them over the years. I think the iHeart incident going viral really hurt the way the band has been viewed since. Although their induction to the rock hall may have helped a bit with that. Those were probably the two biggest moments for the band this decade. 

I see what you're saying with playing the 2 songs but is it a thought process of "oh I wonder what's coming" or "wow what a contrast between old and new"? I think it's a play to push the tour and it seems that the marketing is focused towards that. Makes sense as that's where the money is. I'm just curious and nervous about the remaining 8 songs. What Green Day needs right now is just another classic GD song. 

Foamf is just average in every way. It's an average GD tune with an average performance in streaming and airplay. A lot of people here hate on KYE especially as a lead single choice and even if we consider that song average post-2000 GD this song seems less than that. I like how different the song is but the reaction to it in a large sample size or audience is a little too mixed.

 

 

 

 

[Beerjeezus]

I think it could be possible to come up with a bit better strategy to get exposure from meeting a pop star than getting shitfaced with Post Malone, but whatever. I guess it does the job so yeah 

[Thatsername]

Truth is, I don't see so much strategy in their current marketing strategy, it just seems to be all over the place and kind of random and half-assed, and I can't say it's working for me. But as some of you have already said, I guess their marketing isn't directed at us super-fans, they want to enter new audience groups. There's nothing really wrong with that, but the way they do it looks like they're trying so hard to find new fans that they risk losing old ones, and I don't know if that's so clever. Especially in times like ours - where everyone seems to have a short attention span (like a collective ADHS) and everything is just so "stream it, forget it" - devoted fans who stick with a band for many, many years don't grow on trees, so I as a band would want to keep them. All I know is that I as a fan of 15 years don't really know who Green Day in the year 2019 is or tries to be, they are a mystery to me these days

[stories and songs]

Yeah, I don’t see much being done for actual current fans – and there are a lot of us! It feels like Trilogy promotion, which was playing random shows in weird places (like, The Game Awards? Really?) and making strange marketing efforts like “look our new song is in a video game!” Which reminds me of Trilogy era Angry Birds and having their song in a Twilight movie.

It’s jarring for them to seem so unlike themselves after coming off of the RevRad era that felt so purely Green Day. It felt like they’d finally come to terms with who they are as people and a band and everything was so honest and happy. They had nothing to prove and it showed. Now they seem to be back to rejecting that and being at odds with their past selves. I don’t know where this is coming from but quite frankly I find it disturbing that they’re seemingly having another identity crisis. I didn’t think we’d end up back in this spot and I’m really not interested in partaking.

[That Dude]

On 12/13/2019 at 12:41 PM, Sheenius said:

Yeah I agree. I will say they really pushed FOAMF as a lone single so far but there's been very little talk of the album as a whole and very little interest from both interviewers and the band about the new album. I think if the slam dunk into the rock hall didn't happen it may have been a different story. I think we're due for a new single as well. 

Foamf isn't a horrible song but it's just not the best representation of Green Day or what this album was described as. I think it was definitely worth pushing as a single but there's gotta be something that's more traditional Green Day that can be released vs foamf or fra. 

The challenge for the band is how large their market is. All of us want something different. The one thing American Idiot did well was have a wide range of different singles. I'm typically one for trying new things but that formula may be one worth revisiting. 

 

Interesting, I haven't even THOUGHT about whether or not the new album will have 'traditional' Green Day songs.   

While I am a huge fan of the new vibe and sound, the idea does really excite me.   and Green Day haven't strayed too far from where they started, despite all their evolution as a band.  

I've guessed Insomniac for a previous album to compare this one to, but you've got me thinking it could be Dookie!!!!    Some more experimental sounds of funk and garage rock, and then some classic 94 vibes.   Maybe even some 1039/Kerplunk style as well with the production.   

And the variety in singles, yes!  American Idiot had this dynamic of fast song, slow song (with a few exceptions on the album)  The singles did the same thing (with NO exceptions:  fast/slow/fast/slow/fast single)  

 

[Montclare]

The only thing I find really weird is that they've only been on one late night show so far. Hopefully that changes with the album release.

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

9 minutes ago, Montclare said:

The only thing I find really weird is that they've only been on one late night show so far. Hopefully that changes with the album release.

I agree, I think (and hope) that they're just waiting for the album release. I think that seeing them twice on the same night show within a few months would be impossible, so it kinda makes sense to save this for the album promotion. 

[Lenny]

I read all your responses and all have valid points in them. I think the whole dual marketing with the hella mega tour with pushing dookie and then the pushing of the new song with it is to try and escape any target market. Maybe give us old fans what we want which is a heavy rotation of old songs in the setlist while at the same time push the new song at a new market they may be trying to tap into. 

 

The thing keeping me in right now is the fact we haven't heard 80% of the product. While we all could do something different for them in marketing efforts if we were handling that I do think the most important of the 4 Marketing P's is product. 

For example, Nestle is a billion dollar company that has had several successful marketing campaigns. They pushed a huge marketing effort about how they were going to help underdeveloped nations get milk for infants. A great cause right? Think again... Nestle failed to realize their product required mixing with water - this was targeted to nations that don't have clean drinking water. The product was a mess and people died. Needless to say all that work in the marketing was a waste cause the product killed people. 

[Billie Joes Eyelids]

55 minutes ago, Sheenius said:

I read all your responses and all have valid points in them. I think the whole dual marketing with the hella mega tour with pushing dookie and then the pushing of the new song with it is to try and escape any target market. Maybe give us old fans what we want which is a heavy rotation of old songs in the setlist while at the same time push the new song at a new market they may be trying to tap into. 

 

The thing keeping me in right now is the fact we haven't heard 80% of the product. While we all could do something different for them in marketing efforts if we were handling that I do think the most important of the 4 Marketing P's is product. 

I have no issues with their appearances, but for the life of me I can’t figure out why they keep pushing FOA as a single when it’s doing nothing for them and is obviously not meant to be a chart hit. Honestly I feel the same way about FRA but they’re not pushing that one. It’s just a hockey song. I’m not saying I don’t like either song, I’m just saying they need a new single that resonates with fans and beyond and they need it now to save this album. @Sheenius you seem to know a lot about marketing. Why the extremely slow singles release pace in your opinion? It feels like they’re losing momentum.

[pacejunkie punk]

I wonder if Warner made the decision when FOAM wasn’t a big hit out of the gate to not throw good money after bad and instead focus on their bigger pop acts in these lucrative holiday months.  It’s like when TV shows get cancelled early and don’t get a chance to grow and gain an audience like they used to.  

Do decisions like how many singles to release and when get made at the outset or is it decided on the fly based on how previous singles do?  Green Day just isn’t a hitmaker for Warner like they used to be, they make more money off their back catalogue.

Can something like this force a band into legacy status because of the way they’re regarded and handled by their record label?

[Beerjeezus]

I'd say that the fact that FOAM is coming out in February is enough of a proof that Warner doesn't consider Green Day lucrative enough for the holiday season market.

[pacejunkie punk]

6 minutes ago, Beerjeezus said:

I'd say that the fact that FOAM is coming out in February is enough of a proof that Warner doesn't consider Green Day lucrative enough for the holiday season market.

And apparently not even lucrative enough to release another single 😢

So that’s my question- is this how a band becomes a legacy act, not by choice but by force — external pressures from the label, the culture, etc?  One way to escape that trap is to always be trying something new ie, to not attempt to recreate Dookie or AI over and over and they definitely haven’t done that. What else can they do? Get out from under the label to put stuff out more frequently to stay current maybe. 

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

14 minutes ago, pacejunkie punk said:

And apparently not even lucrative enough to release another single 😢

So that’s my question- is this how a band becomes a legacy act, not by choice but by force — external pressures from the label, the culture, etc?  One way to escape that trap is to always be trying something new ie, to not attempt to recreate Dookie or AI over and over and they definitely haven’t done that. What else can they do? Get out from under the label to put stuff out more frequently to stay current maybe. 

If by legacy act you mean a band that doesn’t produce new music, or anyway focuses more on its legacy rather than creating something new, I don’t think it’s the case with GD in the near future. 
Even if FOAM as a record will not be a commercial success (and I think it’s way too soon to say this, FOAM didn’t perform that bad), the band expressed the desire to release more music more often, with or without Warner. Which is quite the opposite than what I expect from a legacy act. 

Maybe the days of colossal promotions and 5 singles with music video per record are over, but I don’t think this means GD will become a legacy act any time soon.