Kevin Hughes on the importance of brand in the development, growth and sale of GoCompare

Mike Jordan: You worked for Admiral from 1998. Can you tell us more about your role and the early days of Confused.com?

Kevin Hughes: Sure, I worked as the company accountant for Admiral’s subsidiary brands, which included companies like Gladiator, a car and van broker. In late 1999, Henry Engelhardt, the CEO of Admiral, had an idea for a search engine called Confused.com. At that time, people were confused about where to find websites, so myself and a couple of researchers focused on creating researched top 20 lists for things like car insurance. That approach didn’t gain traction, so we pivoted to using a pricing tool that could compare Admiral’s prices with other companies and return quotes quickly, within 24hrs. By 2005, Confused.com was being run by about 15-16 people and had become a key part of Admiral’s share price, being valued at around £1 billion.

MJ: What was your specific role in developing Confused.com?

KH: I was the financial controller and part of the senior management team, responsible for creating the business plans, which were deeply rooted in the marketing strategy. I developed business plans that started with marketing insights, aligning our financial goals with marketing campaigns to ensure we were maximising both brand awareness and business growth. I worked closely with our marketing team to ensure the numbers behind the business were supported by strong, data-driven media buying strategies.

MJ: You eventually transitioned to GoCompare. Could you walk us through that journey?

KH: Yes, in early 2006, Hayley Parsons, who had been involved in partner relationships at Admiral, left to start GoCompare, and by early 2007, I joined her as Finance Director (FD). We set aggressive growth plans and secured more funding, knowing that competitors like Compare the Market and Tesco Compare were entering the market. Using the data and insights we had, we launched big to ensure that by the time they arrived, we had already gained significant market share. We were deeply focused on booking media strategically, so we could launch major campaigns at just the right times, based on patterns we had observed from our competitors.

MJ: You had an unusual title, Chief Finance and Marketing Officer (CFMO). How did you bridge the gap between finance and marketing, two very different disciplines?

KH: It’s definitely rare, but it worked for us because of how tightly integrated our financial and marketing strategies were. My role naturally evolved from being finance-driven into marketing because our business plans were rooted in marketing insights. I would build financial models based on what marketing could deliver, so there was a natural synergy between the two. I knew the numbers, and I had a deep understanding of how marketing needed to perform to achieve those financial results. We used data from campaigns and customer interactions to shape our media buying and creative strategies.

MJ: You’ve mentioned how important data and insights were in your decision-making. Can you elaborate on how you used data to guide your marketing campaigns?

KH: Data was absolutely crucial. From day one, we used brand recognition metrics, conversion data, and performance analytics to shape our campaigns. For example, we knew that name recognition was key to winning in the car insurance comparison market. We had two main goals: to be as strong as Confused.com in TV advertising and to outperform MoneySuperMarket in digital marketing. We monitored our brand sentiment, awareness metrics, and search volumes closely, making adjustments when we saw any decline. Every decision, whether it was increasing ad frequency or tweaking creative elements, was backed by solid data.

MJ: The Gio Compario character became iconic. What role did that play in building the GoCompare brand, and how was data used in shaping that campaign?

KH: Gio Compario was all about name recognition, but it wasn’t just about creating something memorable. We constantly monitored our brand metrics and noticed that the campaigns focusing on name repetition and humour really stuck with people. But it wasn’t just about running the campaign and hoping for the best. We ran frequent tests on name recognition and brand sentiment. When the opera singer started to annoy people, we had to pull back and recalibrate. This constant adjustment, informed by real-time data, allowed us to keep the campaign fresh and maintain high levels of name recognition.

MJ: How important was branding in GoCompare’s overall success?

KH: Branding was everything.

MJ: What challenges did you face in such a competitive market, and how did data help you overcome them?

KH: When we launched, Confused.com and MoneySuperMarket had already established themselves. Our challenge was to compete with both on different fronts—TV and digital. Neither of them was strong on both, so we used our data to launch a dual-pronged attack, excelling in both traditional media and digital performance. For example, we knew that car insurance searches spiked in certain months, so we booked our media campaigns to run in advance of those peaks, giving us a head start. We could predict competitor behaviour using data, and that allowed us to stay ahead. Our first big TV campaign was launched in June 2007, just before our competitors planned to spend heavily in August. By that point, we had already captured significant market share.

MJ: How did you balance the creative aspects of marketing with compliance, especially in a regulated industry like financial services?

KH: Compliance was always at the forefront of everything we did. Financial services are highly regulated, and we had a stringent sign-off process for every piece of media, from PR to ads. There were times when creative ideas needed adjustments to meet compliance standards, but we never saw it as a barrier. In fact, we worked hand in hand with compliance from the outset to make sure we were producing ads that were both engaging and appropriate. Our creative and compliance teams worked together, ensuring that we were never in a position where compliance would derail a campaign.

MJ: As CFMO, you managed both finance and marketing, a rare combination. Did you ever face conflicts between brand investment and short-term profitability?

KH: Surprisingly, not really. Our strategy was always about building both short-term and long-term value. When we launched the Gio campaign in 2009, we saw immediate results, but we knew that the long-term success would come from maintaining that brand strength. Brand investment, if done right, supports both short-term wins and long-term growth. Because I had oversight of both finance and marketing, I could ensure that decisions made for brand-building were aligned with financial goals, avoiding conflicts that might arise if those roles were separated.

MJ: You’ve been away from GoCompare for nine years now. How do you view its growth and what it has become?

KH: I think GoCompare has done incredibly well in the insurance comparison space. However, when I was there, I was pushing for us to move beyond just insurance. The technology we had could have been used to compare a wide range of products, especially in today’s climate where consumers are looking to save on everything. I would have liked to see GoCompare evolve into something similar to U-Switch, comparing everything from utility bills to groceries, but that opportunity remains untapped. That said, the strength of the brand has carried the business well.

Kevin Hughes is a non-executive director at Toward and former CMFO and Co Founder of GoCompare. Mike Jordan is the Co Founder and managing Director at Toward. Big thank you to Kev for taking the time out to chat to Mike.

The Financial Promoter Awards celebrate the efforts of marketing and communications teams across capital markets, personal finance and insurance. You can find out more about the Financial Promoter Awards here.