Firm perfects smart marketing approach to kids and parents explains how the really smart marketers do it.

To begin, create a product line that isn’t needed or necessary: Skin care for children.

. . . a good niche product geared to a relatively new market with few competitors.

It’s a new market because this company (mysteriously not named in the article) made it up. They invented the market. Thy have no competitors because the Unnamed Company made it up first.

And now, the strategy. The Unnamed Company:

. . . speaks on a kid-appropriate level by using “fun” adjectives such as “friendly,” “sunny,” “happy,” and “funny” to describe the products . . . .

. . . appeals to kids’ sensibilities by packaging the products in bright colors and designs . . . .

. . . added entertainment value to the product line with a CD of silly rhymes and songs to serve as mnemonic devices for developing good skin-care habits.

. . . [created a website], providing a forum for learning more about the ingredients, including the “toxic bad guys” found in everyday products. . . . [and] printable checklists for kids to earn stars for performing their skin-care regimen.

Now that’s how you get kids to ask for and parents to buy a completely unnecessary product.

Here’s another one: How do you get a Mom to buy a knife for her toddler?

They strategically placed the words [Kiddy and cutlery] in discrete places where Moms aren’t likely to see them seeing as they are concentrating on getting out of the store before their kid has a melt down.  

Katherine has a point: Even if it’s not sharp, why would Gerber even consider selling a little toddler knife?

Gerber and Kellogg’s must have attended the same product development workshop: Create and Market Products to Confuse Small Children for Fun and Profit.

Blogger and neighborhood activist Ed Kohler passed along this gem to me:

Really, Kellogg’s? Lego fruit snacks for children that look exactly like the Legos with the CHOKING HAZARD NOT FOR CHILDREN UNDER THREE on every box?

Influencial Marketing Blog:

Every once in a while, you see an example of a campaign or product that demonstrates a little too clearly the negative side of marketing and makes you just a little embarassed about your career choice.

Kellogg’s was one of the first companies to join the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. The participants have pledged to alter how they market food to kids — including only advertising foods that meet certain nutritional guidelines and cutting back on the licensed characters.

Kellogg’s says it has to honor its existing contracts, so I’m guessing that the Legos’ contract is one of those that goes into 2009. It looks like they shouldn’t be advertising Lego Fun Snacks to kids at all, since its 13 grams of sugar per serving violates their 12-gram limit.

Unfortunately, the pledge doesn’t extend to marketing really stupid products. Kellogg’s, exactly how do you defend this one?