Trends Report – Super Bowl
One of the best days in advertising recently passed. So unique is this day – it is one of the few times where television viewers look forward to ads. From a marketer’s perspective too, this day is unique. Too many articles have already been written to not know that this day is of course the Super Bowl. Rarely is such money spent for what is essentially glorified run of network advertising. Not glorified it had better be. This year it cost eighty thousand dollars per second to show an untargeted ad, and unlike online ads, these ads cost even more than the spot to create and produce. With all the hype it is no wonder that in this week’s Trends, we look at the commercials of Super Bowl XXXIX with an emphasis on their tie-in to the net.
Many of the usual suspects spent money for the Super Bowl ads – Ford and Pepsi being two such companies. When thinking of industries where one cannot easily track the return on advertising spend, beverages and automobiles are two that certainly come to mind. There is a significant online lead generation business built around the auto industry, one where dealers receive leads from various levels of middle men. These dealers can track the conversion of their leads and generally enough information exists for there to be performance on a traffic group level. This is certainly not the case with television ads, and even more so with ads promoting a new car. The buzz worthiness of the new car should help increase clicks and conversions on auto lead generation sites, especially as they tailor their creative to showcase the new Ford.
Similar to years’ past, Pepsi spent heavily on the Super Bowl. Unlike the automobile industry, there isn’t an online soda lead generation business nor is one likely to pop up any time soon. Companies like Pepsi have no money allocated to direct marketing, so it makes sense that they would be among the largest advertisers in the largest run of network opportunities. Like a growing majority of companies, Pepsi did have a web strategy. Theirs involved teaming with Apple’s iTunes to give away 200 million songs. What may have hurt this incredible promotion is context confusion. Several Pepsi commercials focused on Pepsi / Diet Pepsi while others focused on the promotion. In a sense, there were three brands being pushed without much delineation. Additional confusion came from another prominent advertiser, Napster. The focus on Napster’s campaign was entirely on downplaying the value of iTunes and the iPod player. Their devaluing of the prize could not have helped Pepsi as it attempted to generate buzz.
Each year, there is always one company that puts on the memorable commercial. Similarly, there is always that company where viewers scratch their head and wonder not only what they do but why they are advertising during the Super Bow. This year, both honors belonged to GoDaddy.com. Domain registration is not an easy product to advertise. Domain registration with a brand such as GoDaddy.com is an even tougher proposition. Credit should go to GoDaddy.com for finding an original commercial and one that maximized their exposure, no pun intended. Unfortunately though, it is most likely the case that the commercial itself will be remembered but the brand and the product most likely will not. It is however still remarkable though that a company with no tangible good would decide to risk the 40,000 domain name registrations that they will have to earn in order to break even.
Almost as surprising as GoDaddy’s decision to advertise and what they advertised was how well Ameriquest, the half-time sponsor and a Top 10 boring brand name candidate, transformed an otherwise dull industry into entertaining ad spots. Among all the industries advertising online, mortgage might hold the record for greatest saturation and reach. Between the brandless spam, the widely promoted arbitrage sites run by the likes of Azoogle and Adteractive, to the Orbitz of web page ads, LowerMyBills.com, mortgage ads have the online world covered. How those behind the Ameriquest ads came up with a fresh take on an incredibly overexposed industry is amazing. (One can see them on their web site.) In contrast to these commercials is the cute but ultimately not fulfilling CareerBuilder.com spots featuring a man working with monkeys, a metaphor no doubt to how many feel in their current jobs. Unlike Ameriquest, the CareerBuilder.com spots did not stir any real interest from their many spots.
Yet another clever spot came courtesy of McDonalds. Realizing that people could only tolerate so many commercials about value meals and new burgers, they took a gamble. Their primary spot promoted a French fry shaped like Abraham Lincoln, tying in the web site dedicated to this promotion, lincolnfry.com. In an intriguing strategic move, McDonalds no doubt helped cover some of the costs from the spots by agreeing to have the actual star of the commercials, the fry, auctioned on Yahoo Auctions versus eBay. Like McDonalds, a lavish commercial from Volvo also featured a URL unrelated to their product but intended to drive interest better than would be the case with a company domain. Their "Boldly Go" spot featured an unlikely celebrity tie in, Sir Richard Branson, something done also by Pepsi and FedEx.
Overall, this year’s Super Bowl ads suggest that the internet has matured. Offline, traditional companies relied more on the internet to help continue their messaging. Those promoting a URL were no longer dot question marks, and the dot com companies that did spend online were ones with equity based real revenues and a sustainable business. Based on what was shown, the internet world can continue to look forward to more companies exploring and ultimately becoming comfortable with their online strategy. Those in our space will continue to benefit from the awareness generated and the increasing number of users being drawn to promotions and one off sites. Long live the Super Bowl, and long live Run of Network Advertising!
