While it was a dog of a game (no pun intended), give credit where credit
is due: Seattle was brilliant. Wish I
could say the same about the ads, but I found them to be, on the whole –
eminently (and imminently) forgettable.
Last week, I wrote about Northwestern Kellogg Professor Tim
Calkins’ commercial rating methodology (http://lsternmktg.blogspot.com/2013/01/watching-super-bowl-ads.html). You can boil the framework down to:
1.
Did I like the ad as an ad?
2.
Would I have known whose ad it was as a casual observer?
3.
Did it either reinforce brand positioning or at least create
favorable awareness?
With that in mind, here are my thoughts on yesterday's ads.
Who’s ad
is that?: More and more, it apparently is about creating an ad that people
remember. Remembering whose ad it is is
secondary. Whether the ad enhances the
brand is tertiary. The only reason I
remember who did several of the ads was because I wrote it down. Time to get back to basics of why you
advertise.
Sex,
animals and the flag: It used
to be that “sex sells.” Watching the
commercials, it seems now it is animals and the flag. Most of the animal ads came off as stupid
(Budweiser and Doritos being the exceptions; and their ads ranked first and
second on USA Today’s Super Bowl Ad Meter) and most of the “patriotism ads”
came off as contrived or manipulative (Budweiser’s "Hero’s Welcome” again being
the exception – ranked #3 on Ad Meter).
The only ads I remember with any sexual overtones were SodaStream (liked
it, but not for that reason), the David Beckham H&M ad (liked it, but not
for that reason), and the horrific GoDaddy “BodyBuilder” ad (see below).
Car ads: On the
whole, pretty bad. None of them
effectively used any type of patriotism theme.
Most of them had me guessing as to whose ad it was. I would not have known unless I wrote it down. I don’t want to see Bob Dylan selling
cars. I was intrigued by Maserati; not a
particularly great ad, but I found it interesting that they decided to advertise
when maybe 0.0001% of the people watching were in their target market. The best of the ads, I thought, was the
Toyota Highlander ad with the Muppets.
Favorite
ad(s): Bud Light Epic Night and Epic Night Continued. I thought these ads were clever and I knew
who the advertiser was all along. I just
wish they continued the story with more ads.
Second
place: Cheerios “Gracie”. OK, the
interracial couple was a little cliché, but it was a nice use of the
product. I certainly knew whose ad it
was. And I loved the ending, when the
girl said: ‘And a puppy.”
Third
place: Microsoft “Empowering.”
Maybe the most motivating of all the ads. Rated #1 by Kellogg.
Honorable
mention: Doritos “Cowboy
Kid” (but not Time Machine), Wonderful Pistachios (Part 2), David Beckham
H&M ad (best music). And also a
shout out to Fox for the 24 teasers.
Jack is back.
Worst ad
(ever?): GoDaddy “BodyBuilder”. Last
year, I questioned whether their ad was the worst ad ever. This year’s ad, while awful, wasn’t as bad.
Scary how bad last year’s ad was.
Dishonorable
mention: T-Mobile
(really? Tim Tebow?), Audi Doberhuahua
(exactly what does that dog have to do with your brand? Rated last by Kellogg.)
Ad I am
most conflicted about: Heinz “Happy and You Know It.” I would put this close to the top on “technical
merit.” The brand was evident
throughout; the functionality of the bottle was well documented. But…ketchup on a hot dog?
If your want to see all Ad Meter results, go to http://admeter.usatoday.com/story/sports/ad-meter/super-bowl/2014/02/03/ad-meter-story-final-ad-meter-rankings/5173807/
Finally, if you want to see how the Kellogg folks evaluated the
ads, you can visit http://kellogg.northwestern.edu/news/superbowl/results/2014.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment