This email has also been verified by Google DKIM 2048-bit RSA key

Re: 3314 Mark Test Results FIN

From:robbymook2015@gmail.com To: cheryl.mills@gmail.com CC: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-02-24 16:47 Subject: Re: 3314 Mark Test Results FIN

Wendy is investigating that. I've never tested a mark before like this--I'm basing this on what Joel and Katie have in the memo. On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> wrote: > i was trying to figure out what the objective benchmark was that one tries > to be higher than - do we have that kind of data on how bho's tested or > what the normal brand benchmark test is as starting point? > > cdm > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Robby Mook <robbymook2015@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> It's a bit confusing...the chart shows the percentage of people who gave >> a high score (6 or 7). So for example, 60% gave a 6 or 7 on “keep the >> country moving forward”. Does that answer the question? >> One that worries me, for example, is only 50% are saying that for "makes >> me feel more positively". These are dems, so you'd hope it would be >> higher. >> Like I said, it's fine, but I think we should give one last crack at >> other options. >> >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Cheryl Mills <cmills@cdmillsgroup.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Yes – what I thought was weird is that the numbers were high but the >>> description was not so I couldn’t figure that out. >>> >>> >>> >>> cdm >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Robby Mook [mailto:robbymook2015@gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 24, 2015 12:58 PM >>> *To:* Cheryl Mills >>> *Cc:* Cheryl Mills; John Podesta >>> *Subject:* Re: 3314 Mark Test Results FIN >>> >>> >>> >>> From the Benenson memo: >>> >>> >>> >>> ➢ That said, the mark doesn’t wow these voters. For an audience of core >>> supporters, the enthusiasm is somewhat muted and we don’t appear to be >>> generating the excitement or a sense of a fresh, new candidacy we had hoped >>> for. >>> >>> ✓ Based on our experience, we would expect the mark to achieve a 20- to >>> 25-point higher top-two box (NET 6-7) response on attributes, given that >>> this audience is already on our side, and wanting to cheer HRC on. >>> >>> >>> >>> ➢ The bottom line is that we believe the mark will be a safe, >>> relatively risk-free choice. It’s unlikely to be a source of discontent or >>> ridicule, but by the same token it is unlikely to inspire a strong, >>> enthusiastic response. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Feb 24, 2015, at 12:43 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> What was the excitement deficit? >>> >>> >>> >>> The summary of testing I saw looked pretty good >>> >>> >>> >>> cdm >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Robby Mook <robbymook2015@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Madame Secretary, Cheryl, John, >>> >>> As I've discussed with some of you separately, we felt like we needed to >>> get some other options on the table before choosing a final mark. I feel >>> very confident that the one we have from Pentagram is a very safe and will >>> do the work we need, but the testing showed an enthusiasm deficit. We also >>> felt generally in our guts that it didn't have the "wow" factor we want. >>> To be clear, we may never find a "wow" option, which is why we shouldn't >>> feel that the Pentagram option is sub-par. That said, we decided we owe >>> ourselves some other options and are going to task three other firms with >>> getting us some new designs over the next few days. If we see something we >>> like, we can choose to test it against the Pentagram mark or just move >>> forward. >>> >>> I spoke with Wendy about this plan this morning and doesn't think it's >>> the right way to go, but was willing to proceed. I wanted to flag this in >>> case she reaches out. >>> >>> She and Teddy will be supervising the incoming creative from the other >>> firms. She is also going to drill down with Benenson on the data we >>> received since she thinks there needs to be further context on the >>> enthusiasm measure. >>> >>> So--that's the plan! Let me know if you have any questions or want to >>> discuss. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Robby >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: *Katie Connolly* <kconnolly@bsgco.com> >>> Date: Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:07 PM >>> Subject: 3314 Mark Test Results FIN >>> To: Robby Mook <robbymook2015@gmail.com>, Jim Margolis < >>> Jim.Margolis@gmmb.com>, Mandy Grunwald <gruncom@aol.com>, "Teddy Goff ( >>> teddy.goff@gmail.com)" <teddy.goff@gmail.com>, "hellowendyclark@me.com" >>> <hellowendyclark@me.com> >>> Cc: Joel Benenson <jbenenson@bsgco.com> >>> >>> Evening all, >>> >>> >>> >>> Please find attached a memo outlining the results of the mark test. Let >>> us know if you have any questions. Joel is on a flight for the next few >>> hours, but I’ll do my best to answer them. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Katie >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *Katie Connolly* >>> >>> Vice President >>> >>> >>> >>> *Benenson Strategy Group* >>> >>> 1901 Pennsylvania Ave | 10th Floor >>> >>> Washington DC, 20006 >>> >>> O: 202-688-1771 >>> >>> C: 202-299-4599 >>> >>> *www.bsgco.com <http://www.bsgco.com/>* >>> >>> >>> >>> *<image001.png>* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >