Budweiser
Another Super Bowl and another blowout by Budweiser. If only Budweiser could just keep this kind of advertising focus the rest of the year. There were minor setbacks however, having Bud Select as a sponsor just reminded me of the confusion this brand causes in the mind. But that said Bud and Bud Light had several outstanding ads which scored big with me and viewers alike. My favorite was the young Clydesdale dreams big ad. Any parent with young children had to be pulled at the heartstrings by this one. My second favorite was the men on rooftops pretending to work but relaxing with a Bud Light instead. What man doesn’t dream of that? Really all the Budweiser ads struck a balance between humor, heritage and brand message. Three cheers for the King.
Gillette
This was not your typical babes, boobs, animals and special effects kind of Super Bowl ad. But I think it was terribly effective. It might not have been discussed at the water cooler. But I do think it made a lasting impression in the minds of male shavers, a majority of the audience. It really showed and explained the new Fusion razor. The audience was right and the message was clear. Men need to shave with a Fusion. Gillette has the money to spend on the Super Bowl to get the message out in a big way. With the product all over the shelves I think many men and women will be pushed into buying the new razor this week.
Dove
The first purely female-targeted ad for Dove skin products had a powerful message promoting the self-esteem of young girls. I think the ad worked for three reasons. It was the opposite of all the other ads, it didn’t belong on the Super Bowl which made you stop, watch and think about it. Second, because it was the first ad of its kind to run on the Super Bowl it got a lot of positive PR on places like the Today Show which was enormously powerful. Three, it is a wonderfully produced ad with an important message. A message all of us need to be reminded of. The fakeness of the Super Bowl ad models and cheerleaders is not the everyday woman. If I were Dove I would not run the ad next year, by then the uniqueness and PR value will have worn off. Dove will be better off spreading the message advertising on more relevant shows like Oprah or the Academy Awards.
Tomorrow I'll discuss the losers. Chimps, Cavemen, and GoDaddy oh my!
Tim, I am glad to hear you agree with me about Gillette. I didn't read much in the media about it. But when I saw that ad, it really helped me understand why the prodcut was better. The visual was powerful. And then they followed that up with Ben Roethlisberger's beard being shaved off on the Dave Letterman show using the Fusion. Brilliant!!!
Posted by: Laura | February 2006 at 11:12 AM
Laura,
I completely agree with you about Gillette's commercial. It wasn't the funniest or the most exciting, but it sold the product. The ad did a great job of explaining what the product is, what the product does, and how the product will help you. I use Gillette and I'm going to pick one up next time I'm at Target. That is a lot more than I can say about Ameriquest.
The difference between Budweiser humor and Ameriquest humor is that Budweiser actually includes a distinct brand message and a clear connection to the product. The Budweiser commercials were by far the most "creative" and "effective" of the spots.
Did you catch the Full Throttle ad right before kickoff? I thought it was brilliant and was funny, yet had a clear brand message and product pitch.
Posted by: Tim Asimos | February 2006 at 10:56 AM
Thanks Tim. I deleted the posting immediately. When I saw them this morning I figured it was some sort of spam. I appreciate your message. It is really frustrating that people do that.
Posted by: Laura | February 2006 at 08:46 AM
Laura,
Vika's two postings (above)are spreading a trojan through their links and the sites are really in poor taste. Just thought everyone should know.
I'm really against censorship, but when people takwe advantage of a medium like blogs and an innocent site to hurt others it's wrong. I strongly suggest that these two be deleted before they damage other peoples files and your reputation.
Don't follow the links posted on Vika's comments.
http://smallbusinessinternetmarketingcenter.com
Posted by: Tim | February 2006 at 04:39 AM
Steve said much of what I would say. Very few of these commercials helped build an emotional connection with prospective costumers, or reinforce it the with their existing ones. Better yet, very few adhered to any of the fundamental elements of brand building. Most of them were entertainment.
Posted by: ray | February 2006 at 12:43 PM
Steve you are so right. In general, advertising is not terribly effective. And the most talked about ads people can usually never remember what product or even sometimes what category was being sold. Priceless is an excellent example of a memorable ad with little impact at least for the MasterCard brand. It did more to help Visa. A weak #2 brand gets little help from a powerful or funny ad promoting the category.
A powerful leader like Budweiser needs to advertise on the Super Bowl to reinforce its brand and block the competition from getting on the game. The beer ads were funny but you are right they didn't talk about Bud. But since they are the leader the brand did benefit. Hopefully more guys will drink more beer instead of wine and vodka.
Posted by: Laura | February 2006 at 04:34 PM
Laura,
Sorry to disagree, but I seriously doubt the ads were as half as effective as they were entertaining.
For example, I really enjoyed the commercial with the guys on the roof. The problem is I really couldn't tell you which beer the "guys on the roof" were promoting until you told me.
I think most people in general have this same problem. So many ads, so little impact. We know the commercials, but don't know the product or service they're pushing.
Remember the "priceless" commercials? Who doesn't right? Problem is I really can't tell you if its for Mastercard or Visa. I wonder how many more people are out there suffer from "ad amnesia" like me.
My guess is alot.
Posted by: Steve Liberati | February 2006 at 03:34 PM