As 2009 draws to a close, I wanted to list a few of my favorite ad campaigns.  These ads stand out to me for a number of reasons.  In no particular order:

Ford: One More Reason
This is a well done campaign and a bright spot in what has been a terrible year for American auto manufacturers.  Traditionally, auto ads focused on features and value: “With stow and go seating, dual differentials, and the best towing capacity in its class, the Super Mobile is now a superior value with 3.8% financing for 48 months.”  Some have deviated with a focus on other factors like “sportiness,” but few have ventured into the territory of real people who actually drive real cars.  Instead, most auto ads are a never ending parade of either feature lists or people driving 100 mph on roads that you aren’t allowed to use in real life.

Ford’s new campaign breaks that mold with a whole series of 15 second ads featuring real individuals talking about the things they care about with their cars.  The people in the ads were told they were participating in a focus group, and only after participating were they asked if the video could be used in the ads.  The results show: the ads are honest and highlight features in a way that matters to people on a personal level.

HTC: You
Cellular phone maker HTC has a bit of a quandary.  Outside of the US they’re well known, but inside the US they’re relatively unknown.  Which isn’t to say they don’t do a lot of business in the US – it’s just that most of their phones are rebranded and sold by other companies.

HTC has another problem: Apple and Motorola.  Apple is obvious – because of the iPhone.  But Motorola has been winning accolade after accolade for the Droid, a smartphone powered by Google’s Android operating system.  But guess who made the first Android phone?  HTC, except it was rebranded as the T-Mobile G1 (see above).

HTC wants to start selling phones and needs to be taken seriously as a smartphone manufacturer, but to do that they need to be taken seriously as a brand.  It would be all too tempting to produce an ad that dives right into feature comparisons (why the Droid doesn’t match the power of the HTC Passion), but first they need all those basic things a consumer brand needs: trust, likability, awareness, etc.  The You campaign works because it solves the branding part of a broader strategic problem with a very enjoyable and memorable ad.

Levi’s: Go Forth
I like these ads because they’re just so beautiful and well made.  The Walt Whitman poetry coupled with the brilliant camera work captures my attention every time the ad comes on.

But do they sell jeans?  No idea.  Don’t care.

Verizon: There’s a Map for That
While Apple did well with the iPhone this year, AT&T did not do so well with their network.  Enter Verizon with a well timed and well made ad campaign that highlights the sad differences between their nationwide network and AT&T’s lousy 3G network.

While it’s not a groundbreaking campaign, the ads worked so well that AT&T tried to sue Verizon for all kinds of random things just to make them stop.  It didn’t work, so instead AT&T launched their own campaign comparing download rates between the two networks.  I guess we’ll have to see which one works better, assuming a CDMA iPhone ever appears.

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2009. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: 2009, advertising, ford, htc, levi's, verizon

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Seth Stevenson at Slate just reviewed what may be the best worst ad ever.  He describes it as the most sexually explicit ad he’s ever seen, and I have to agree.  This one is pretty out there for American audiences.  Honeslty, it’s probably out there for international audiences as well.

You can click the link to the Slate article to watch it.  I’m not posting it here.  But to keep things short, here’s the summary:

A super hot secretary is called into an office by her manager.  The next scene shows the manager looking like he’s, umm, having the time of his life with someone under his desk.  Then there’s a pitch for a 6 hour energy product, and then the manager jumps up and shouts that “he’s ready.”

So why is this ad “best” in any way?  If the target audience is college aged men who party a lot and who watch Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, and Spike after 10:00 PM, then this ad probably hits the mark.  It’s memorable, and this demographic can consume energy drinks like water.

Why is this ad the “worst?”  Well, take this quote from the article:

Other ads in the 6 Hour Power campaign target slightly different demographics. An ad for the G4 network shows a video gamer first-person-shooting for hours on end, his focus sharpened by the energy drink. Another ad shows a harried mother chasing a toddler and airs on stations like E! and ABC Family. “There’s no one type of person we’re trying to reach,” Finnochio explains. “Everyone needs energy.”

So basically this company is going to try to reach lots of demographics with different kinds of ads.  There’s nothing wrong with that except for one small detail: the Internet has a nasty habit of combining demographics together.  In other words, plenty of “harried mothers” who watch ABC Family will see this ad on Slate or other places.  It will get plastered on Twitter, Facebook, and everywhere else.  Soon, all those other groups will have only one association in mind when they see this product: disgust.

Companies have to be really careful when they put together memorable ads meant for one market when they also want their product to be adopted by other markets as well.  Sometimes, they can be trapped into a segment with no way to escape.

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2009. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, marketing, slate

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Just like Coke and Pepsi are the big two of soda manufacturers, there are also a big two of SLR cameras: Nikon and Canon. (SLR cameras are the traditional 35mm cameras with the big lenses on the front you can take on and off, like this one here.) Both Canon and Nikon make top flight cameras, both are well respected, and both are far far ahead of the rest of the competition. Yet Canon is the top manufacturer, and has for the last several years outsold Nikon in every segment from beginner to pro. Many have recently accused Canon of resting on its laurels, and Nikon has certainly not taken its number two position lightly. So it’s interesting to look a little more closely at two recent ads from both companies.

Nikon D60 & Ashton Kutcher

The Nikon D60 is Nikon’s latest generation of entry level SLR camera, targeted at a market of beginner photographers. The typical buyer is best described as aspirational, wanting better photos than a point-and-shoot camera can offer. They want to take photos that look good, while at the same time branching out into more artistic photography when the interest strikes.

This ad perfectly delivers on these values. Nikon positions the D60 as the perfect camera for a wedding, and Ashton Kutcher’s portrayal as a goofy everyman nicely sums up the buyer. Even the use cases are spot on with Ashton photographing everything from the wedding party to a butterfly. The ideals of what an SLR can do for a market of aspirational photographers are presented clearly and effectively, and it’s no wonder these cameras are selling like hotcakes.

Canon Rebel XSi

Up until recently, Canon’s ads have focused more on consumer point-and-shoot models with celebrities like Maria Sharapova and her talking dog. This has long been a more competitive market, but when it came to their SLRs, Canon has always been a little cocky. Now the SLR fun is over, and they’ve begun their own advertising campaign:

The Rebel XSi directly competes with the D60 and targets almost the same market. With this ad, the not so subtle reminder is that when it comes to your photography, you should trust the company that has helped capture some of the greatest sports photos of the last 20 years. Canon dominates the pro market, and their telephoto lenses, painted a distinctive gray, are ubiquitous at sporting events. Their message is that if you want to be aspirational, aspire to use what the pros use.

While beginner photographers make up the bulk of the Rebel market, Canon has a fine line to walk with their advertising. The Rebel line is actually very popular with pros as well, largely because it’s a light weight camera with a lot of hidden power. Canon can’t alienate this market and needs to remind them that the Rebel makes for a great small SLR. However, beyond this point, Canon also needs to keep their pro customers happy in general. Nikon’s new D300 and D3 cameras have attracted tons of glowing press, and just about everyone has started questioning their brand loyalties. Any pro related advertising is good advertising.

Conclusion and Grades

Both ads are good, but Canon’s ad comes up a little short. They’re an 800 lb gorilla with an 800 lb gorilla advertisement. Their value proposition is essentially “we’re the choice of pros,” but that’s entirely because of product choices they made in the past and has nothing to do with the average consumer. Nikon, on the other hand, ties their message to what the consumer actually wants today, creating a more powerful ad that nicely connects with the needs of the buyer.

Nikon: A-
Canon: B

Coming soon, a look at another camera manufacturer: Leica.

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, canon, marketing, nikon

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Closed captioning on television is just plain broken. I wrote before asking why advertisers don’t add captions to their ads, but today I realized the opposite problem can *cough* arise. Sometimes a caption from an ad may fail to clear and can remain sticky with the remainder of the broadcast.

The following broken closed caption images are from a television in a local sandwich shop. The TV was tuned to Fox News and had this one single caption locked in place for the entire time I sat eating. Broken TV? Broken transmission network? Broken ad? Broken Fox News?

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | 4 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, closed captioning, tv

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

With apologies to Thomas Friedman, the World is Flat. For a marketer, that means two things: your products must be global and so should your advertising. In the past, it was possible to brand and advertise differently in different markets, but that’s no longer true. An ad produced in one country will be posted on Youtube for the entire world to see, while branding can suddenly go from local to global in the blink of an eye. Witness the trouble with the Ford Fusion when Ford’s global marketers failed to communicate – they ended up trying to differentiate a sedan in the US from a totally unrelated little SUV in Europe.

Of course, nationalistic advertising can be real trouble. Nationalism rarely works on a global stage, either because only one group will actually “get it” or because some other group to which you market will find it offensive. Which brings me to this recent ad for Absolut Vodka:

The message is simple: in an Absolut world, Mexico would still own the Western United States. Of course, for anyone who has forgotten their American history, Mexico lost this region after Texas seceded in 1836 and the United States won the Mexican-American War with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848.

Obviously, it’s a subject of nationalism for both sides, but that’s beside the point. Absolut is a global brand, and vodka is consumed worldwide. While the ad was originally intended for a Mexican audience, the Internet thwarts attempts at regional advertising and makes all media global. Perhaps Absolut wanted “edgy” and this was their intention, but advertising this way is incredibly risky.

Border security and immigration issues are at the forefront of American politics, and many Americans are incredibly sensitive about these topics. While this ad may grow vodka sales in Mexico, many middle-class Americans who have long formed the core market for Absolut’s trendy alcohol will be turned off. Already, some conservatives are calling for a boycott, showing that Absolut has probably done more harm than good to their brand.

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: absolut, advertising, border, ford, fusion, global, marketing, mexico, vodka

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Quick question: why do so many advertisers not close caption their TV ads? While eating in a noisy restaurant the other day, I noticed the ubiquitous TV-tuned-to-ESPN had been muted with the captioning turned on. While the broadcast was close captioned, probably only about 30% of the ads were.

For advertisers, the economics of actually close captioning an ad should be a total no brainer! It’s a 30 second static piece of footage that may only rarely change between markets. It can’t be that expensive to get someone to type a page or two of text into the captioning system! Yet the number of people who are watching who would still see your ad, either because they are deaf or because they happen to be watching in bars or restaurants, is probably quite large.

Unless someone can tell me why these economics don’t add up, I’m inclined to believe it’s pure laziness; and that’s a total shame. For the amount of money spent on making an ad campaign, it strikes me as incredibly odd that nobody thinks of the strategy behind captioning it.

And if that’s not convincing, think of it this way. People who are watching TV and reading your ad are guaranteed to be paying attention to it! While their numbers are few, their attention is assured. Reach out to them!

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | 4 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, closed captioning, marketing, tv

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

David Boland, who graduated with me in my MBA class at Cornell, just launched a really interesting new business called AdJack. David’s site lets you watch advertisements in exchange for a chance to win a cash prize, all while letting you rate the ads you like and dislike. Each time you watch an ad, you get a random number. Watch six ads, get six numbers, and be entered into a lottery with a $100,000 prize.

David’s a great guy and he’s been working on this project for over a year. And if you’re not the type to be impressed by an entrepreneur starting a new business, then you should also know that prior to business school Dave was an F-18 fighter pilot instructor for the US Marines!

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: adjack, advertising, cornell, entrepreneur, startup, video

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Being both an iPhone owner and an Audi owner, I absolutely love Apple’s new commercial titled “Cars.”

Consequently, I also think the Audi Superbowl commercial was the best of the night. I wonder if I can use my iPhone to find the best deal on a $118,000 Audi R8?

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2008. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, apple, audi, cars, iphone, r8

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

American Express has long run some pretty interesting ads, but their theme lately has focused on celebrities and their American Express credit cards. A good example is this ad with film director Wes Anderson.

A few weeks ago, a new ad appeared featuring singer Beyoncé Knowles. At first glance, the ad appears similar to the other ads: a celebrity lives life and extols the virtues of her credit card by example. However this one is a little different.

The problem with most of the Amex ads seen so far is one of celebrity scale. Wes Anderson uses his credit card to rent a helicopter for $15,000. M. Night Shyamalan somehow uses his card to see ghosts and expensive special effects. Shaun White goes on a round-the-world vacation looking for snow. None of these people are using their cards for anything…normal!

The Beyoncé ad is refreshingly different for a number of different reasons, but the biggest is how it portrays the day-to-day routine of Ms. Knowles. Quite simply, she’s busy. She runs a major performance act, travels constantly, has to make frequent decisions, deals with constant adversity, all while trying to stay a good role model for her family. In short, the ad features Beyoncé the busy executive rather than Beyoncé the celebrity.

These days, American Express appeals to a number of market segments, but without a doubt they’re associated with affluence. No other brand carries quite the same cachet, even to the point that Amex has to dream up bigger and better offerings for their most wealthy users. With affluence also comes an association with busy business leaders, and that’s why this particular ad works so well. The people most likely to identify with this ad are not the typical music fans but rather the overworked business travelers who never have time to see Madrid while trying to keep up.

For these people, just like Beyoncé in this ad, American Express does not somehow redefine their professional experience. Instead, the card is a tool that solves problems in a way that other cards just can’t quite match. The impression is simple and powerful: no self-respecting business leader should leave home without their American Express card (catchy slogan…) because it saves time, adds peace of mind, and makes it easier to focus on whatever it is they really do. A+

© Stanton for Stanton Champion, 2007. | Permalink | No comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: advertising, amex, beyoncé, marketing

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh