The Super Bowl is over for one more year......

The Super Bowl is over for another year and with it came another set of fantastic advertisements. These are usually the most talked about ads of the year and costing $2.4 to $3 million they would want to be. The ads have moved from being an interruption to being part of the main event. According to a survey undertaken by the US’s Retail Advertising and Marketing association 26.9% of people rated the Super Bowl ad’s as the most important part of the day.

That perhaps is some justification for the amount of money spent. Viewers’ sit down and wait to see your ads, the complete opposite of what is audiences are doing for other programs. The trend is that viewers are actively avoiding the ads by flicking channels, doing something else or fast forwarding through them with ad skipping technologies such as TiVo. Viewers’ critique them immediately afterwards, both with friends at Super Bowl parties and online. It is a process that separates the good from the bad, meaning they have to be the best. It is clear why air time costs so much, and why many big brands invest heavily in them. This year saw ads from Dr. Pepper and this year’s top rated ad from snickers (See Below) amongst others.

However in what might seem like a strange move Pepsi have decided not to run a Super Bowl ad for the first time in 23 years, instead they have decided to focus their attention on Facebook and an online strategy. This is a brave move by Pepsi who have historically invested heavily in celebrity endorsement (Britney Spears and David Beckham, to name just two) and less than average in online marketing. They cited getting close to the customer as a main reason for this decision. Ralph Santana, vice-president of marketing for PepsiCo North America said customers:

"...are looking for more of a two-way dialogue, story-telling and word of mouth. Mediums like the digital space are much more conducive towards that."

So is this the beginning of the end for traditional advertising, if big brands are moving away from it? Doritos (the only PepsiCo owned brand advertising at this year’s Super Bowl) provide a good example of what I believe we will see more of in the future. They have merged both traditional and online campaigns, one form supports the other and Doritos reap the benefits of both. Doritos launched a competition to for their customers to design their ad for the Super Bowl, entries are loaded onto the website and the winner is eventually voted for online (available at http://www.crashthesuperbowl.com/#/winners ). By doing this Doritos manage to hack into the creativity of their customers and discover how they really feel about the brand. The winning ad is then broadcast during the Super Bowl, reaching a wide audience eager to see it. I think this is quite a clever approach to take and that we will be seeing more and more brands adopting this tactic in the future.

DR. Pepper and Kiss



Snickers, 2010 best ranked ad


1 of Doritos 5 finalists

The Superbowl is coming up...

ETrade is a financial corporation based in the US and is divided into trading & investing, retirement & planning and banking & credit cards. As the name ETrade implies they concentrate on online services, e.g. buying stock online. Last week we discussed the use of humour in ads for “serious” products such as financial services.

ETrade paid $ 3 million to place their snarky baby ad during last year’s Superbowl. Although most of us did not really like this ad, it was a huge success because after the broadcast 19 million people surged on the website.