Verizon

Super Bowl 58 Grins and Groans

Nader AshwayLeave a comment

Super Bowl 58 has come and gone, and two things are evident: Post Malone is a pretty darn good singer, and the Chiefs are apparently a very good football team. [Congratulations to them and their fans on being the first team to win back-to-back championships since the New England Patriots nearly 20 years ago.]

Speaking of back-to-back, it appears the advertising bowl was a repeat of last year as well. Nothing risky, nothing wildly interesting, nothing off the wall but really smart. You like to be WOWED with Super Bowl advertising, and – for the second year in a row – I suspect there were not a lot of “wows” being uttered in living rooms across the world.

Some themes that emerged last night:

Religion is apparently making a comeback. A total of five spots were dedicated to some form of religiosity: two spots for Jesus, a spot reminding us to stand up to Jewish hate (sad that we have to be reminded of that,) the annual pitch for Scientology, and Mark Wahlberg hawking Hallow, a new prayer app. (Sad that we need an app for that.)

Repetition was a theme last night as well. And this I like. If you’re trying to get some of the 115 million+ people (in the US) watching the game to REMEMBER you, repetition is a pretty strong tool. And if you can repeat creatively, all the better. A few brands managed to pull this off last night, some with more efficiency than others. Kate McKinnon’s cat meows over and over again, but it sounds like “mayo” for Hellmann’s; and Aubrey Plaza continually reminding us she’s having a “blast” for Mountain Dew; both were fairly effective. But Arnold Schwarzenegger using his own accent as a comic tool when he repeats the word “nay-bah” for State Farm and their “like a good neighbor” tagline was both effective AND funny. And Doordash really hit the repetition ball out of the park with their spot, continually repeating the word “dash” to great effect, while reminding viewers of the actual brand name in the process.

Meta, (the concept, not the company,) was also a theme. We saw a lot of spots using the “let’s make a commercial about making a commercial” theme. It’s a strong device, given that this is the biggest platform on the planet for commercial-making.

HONORABLE MENTIONS:

BetMGM bet on Vince Vaughn doing Vince Vaughn things, and it worked. Throw in Tom Brady and Wayne Gretzky for the typical Super Bowl celebrity-stuffing and you get a pretty good spot.

Ken Jeong is just hilarious, and his turn as a recently-unfrozen-cryogenic-experiment was a laugh. When he’s told it’s Popeye’s, he asks “the sailor man?” Loved it, and sincerely hope that was ad-libbed.

Christopher Walken being hounded by people attempting Christopher Walken impersonations is always welcome. And BMW wrapped it up nicely with the line “the rest are just imitations.”

Reese’s probably gave us the most fun spot of the night with “big change.” Narrator having fun with a roomful of people having outsized reactions – classic fun, and pretty memorable.

Poppi soda made a nice, simple, smart statement about their soda being better than what we all think “soda” is. Less sugar, prebiotics, cool flavors. Nice.

PlutoTV did a nice job of growing couch potatoes in an entertaining spot for their streaming service. They had a good gag, and took it all the way to the farm.

And let’s face it. Chris Pratt kinda does look like the Pringles guy, right?

GRINS:

T-Mobile has been crushing it on Super Bowl ads the last couple of years, and they kept it up with two fun spots. They love singing in their commercials, and this year we got Jason Momoa showing off his pipes and some feats of acrobatics. And their “audition” spot, a Bradley-Cooper-and-his-mom spot, which featured cameos by Laura Dern, Patrick J. Adams and Gabriel Nacht of “Suits” fame, Common, and Jennifer Hudson was entertaining and smart to boot (the idea is no one has to “audition” to get T-Mobile’s Magenta Status VIP treatment.)

Last year, Dunkin’ went all in on the Ben Affleck/Jennifer Lopez thing, and they’ve continued the story this year with Ben trying to break into the pop music business with his group “The Dunkings,” which also features Tom Brady on keyboards. Probably not the best brand-building spot we’ve ever seen, (they’re going all in on the Boston thing,) but it’s cute, and the self-effacing turn from Matt Damon made it really funny.

Disney+ put in a surprisingly good turn this year with their “well said” spot. Just plain typewriter text (not quite Courier, but close,) on a white screen, scrolling through some of the more memorable phrases in Disney history, including “who’s the fairest of them all?” and “the Force will be with you…always” and “To infinity…and beyond.” Some might call this lazy. I saw it as a way to break through the clutter (and a noisy living room hosting a Super Bowl party) and deliver something powerful. Winner of the “sneaky good” category.

NFL made some important statements about bullying and mental health in two semi-PSAs/semi-self-congratulatory spots. But their full length spot, featuring Quesi, a young boy from Ghana with big NFL dreams, made a salient point: “it doesn’t matter where you’re born, as long as you’re born to play.” That line is delivered by Osi Umenyiora, a former NFL player of Nigerian descent. The NFL is committed to growing the game internationally, and this spot shed light on that initiative with warmth and fun and facts. Well done.

One of my favorites of the evening was this spot for CeraVe, another meta take on commercial-making, where quirky actor Michael Cera is pitching the dermatology board at CeraVe skin care to use him as their spokesman. The screen cuts to bold text (love that Din Pro font family,) that says “Developed with Dermatologists. Not Michael Cera.” It manages to deliver silliness, seriousness, a singular brand platform that their products are indeed developed by dermatologists, name recognition and memorability all at once. Exactly what a Super Bowl spot should do.

This spot from Verizon, featuring Beyonce trying to “break the Internet” was a masterclass in over the top advertising. First off, she’s wildly popular. Second, she pretty much HAS broken the Internet over her career. This spot features her going to outrageous lengths to TRY and break the Internet, but Verizon’s incredible coverage never wavers. A great performance by Beyonce, a hint of self-effacing humor shows she doesn’t take herself THAT seriously, and lots of smart and timely pop culture references. And that she’s using it as a platform to tease/drop new music is even cooler.

I think one of the best spots of the night was made by Bud Light. A return to form for this brand, (who has been in the news the last year or two for all the wrong reasons,) which is to be big, brash, unapologetically silly and fun. They take a simple concept, stretch it out as far as it can go, add a couple of big celebrities (Peyton Manning and Post Malone, with a cameo by Tyrannosaurus Rex,) and execute the heck out of it. The perfect recipe for really strong Super Bowl advertising.

MY WINNER:

Dove returns with another smart ad that’s tactfully and intelligently delivered. Using the “It’s a Hard Knock Life” song, we see a montage of girls flubbing it at sports from gymnastics to ice skating, basketball and softball. And even though they do, they smile and press on. The text on the ad reads “the knocks don’t stop girls playing sports…low body confidence does.” Wow. BANG. The ad gets quiet, and we get a peek at a young girl in a bathing suit looking at herself somewhat disapprovingly in a mirror. Text reads “45% of girls quit sports by age 14…together we can keep them in the game.” And we’re encouraged to “Join the Body Confident Sport program.” This brand hardly sells soap anymore – they sell esteem and female empowerment and tolerance and acceptance and…and..and…Great work as usual.

GROANS:

The Google Pixel ad was a good moment. Lovely story of a semi-blind man named Javier who is now able to capture photos on his phone with the help of the phone’s AI assistant. I liked it initially, and the final scene was touching. It’s also technically good advertising because it focuses on a singular feature. I just think that accessibility is about so much more than taking selfies, and I thought this ad undercut the mission a little bit.

The Nerds Gummy Clusters ad was just kind of confusing. It features Addison Rae, a Gen Z singer/influencer, and a blobby Nerd candy (I guess?) recreating the iconic scene from Flashdance. It just felt weirdly mistargeted, as I’m not sure how much of the Super Bowl audience under 40 would even know or remember Flashdance. Compare this with the Skechers ad using Mr.T as a conduit – at least those sneakers are targeted to an aging Gen X audience that would actually know who he is.

All of the Homes.com ads (there were three of them at least,) went too far into the gags without clearly making the points they were hoping to deliver. The ads say some really good things about the brand like “gathering up close and detailed information on neighborhoods, and hiring top experts to get you insider info on local schools…” All good stuff, but the core messaging gets blurred out in the outlandish mayhem designed to be funny. They further confused the point by introducing Jeff Goldblum into one of the ads – he’s the Apartments.com spokesman – for comedic effect. The only effect it had was an unclear value proposition, poorly delivered across several ads. The parent company, CoStar Group, reportedly spent $35 million on all their ad exposure. Yikes.

Oreo delivered a big-budget ad with big scenarios throughout history left to chance, with decision-makers deciding on which way to go by “twisting on it.” Yeah – they twist their Oreo cookies, and if the cream is on the left, homo sapiens split off from the dinosaurs and survive the asteroid hit that kicks off the ice age. If the twist reveals cream on the right, we get boy bands and the Kardashians. Ugh. I always like the let’s-show-the-product-in-action approach, so I’ll submit that as a plus. But “let’s twist on it” sounds forced, and it looked that way too.

I know it’s sacrilege, but is it okay if I didn’t like the Martin Scorsese-directed spot for Squarespace? It just seemed like more of a commentary on people’s obsession with smartphones, and made exactly ZERO mention of any brand benefits. Squarespace is a website that makes it easy to build websites, and it’s never mentioned. Not once. And the only ones who use it are aliens trying to get noticed? Then they end with the tagline “A website makes it real.” Makes WHAT real, exactly? Meh.

And probably my biggest groan of the night was Crowdstrike’s attempt at a “big” commercial for the Super Bowl. It’s set in the Wild West…in the past? Or is it a post-apocalpytic future? Hard to tell. Some people are dressed like it’s 1820. The spokeswoman is standard 2024 every-woman. What the what? And if you’re still watching, she tells the cyborg sheriff (not kidding) that she’s got it covered. Then she proceeds to digitally undress the invading virus-borgs (also not kidding) so they’re embarrassed and run away. I think I’ve got that right. What a confusing mess.

But hey, at least we didn’t have to watch any faux-patriotic spots from Weather Tech, right? What were your favorites? Let’s hear it in the comments.

Until next year!

What’s next. For text.

Nader AshwayLeave a comment

This week, it was announced that Apple is adopting RCS (Rich Communications Service) as a standard feature on its next iOS version. RCS is aptly named, as it does enable more rich forms of communication to be sent over the texting network. (Textwork? Nextext? Just spitballing.) Now, instead of just text in a blue – sometimes green – bubble, or the occasional animated GIF from friends or bit.ly link from brands, images and videos can now be shared, and even interactive features.

Obviously, this news is rife with marketing and business implications.  A survey from Juniper Research, a UK-based telecom research firm, found that “business messaging traffic will grow from $1.3 billion to $8 billion in 2025.” Wowzers. That’s a lot. And soon. Some of that growth is to be realized in no small way by Apple’s 900 million devices entering the fray.

RCS is also notable for providing end-to-end encryption so that messages can’t be intercepted. Apple, who has been prickly about privacy, especially as it relates to marketing via mobile devices, probably saw this is an opportunity to deliver more robust services to iPhone users while toeing the line of its newer, harsher security stance.

As it relates to marketing, the possibilities seem both endless and exciting. More rich media often holds the door open for more robust and interactive engagements. Surveys. Games. Direct app downloads. Oh my!

So, could this be a kind of renaissance moment for the oft-maligned outpost known as direct marketing? Methinks perhaps. Instead of just offering the standard “reply STOP to opt-out” or  “1 to reply YES” options, recipients of RCS messages can now explore the brands’ text-messaged offerings in private, low-risk interactions and decide (if the brands do this correctly) on a number of engagement pathways.

So everybody wins: brands get to design and deliver more interesting and more entertaining features directly to consumers to increase engagement and drive whatever metrics they’re chasing. Consumers get to engage with cooler marketing tactics while still feeling in control of the conversation (remember, you can opt out or just delete anytime you like.) Heck, direct marketing wins by getting a slick, new, digital shot in the arm.

But the real winners? It’s the carriers.

That’s right. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile. At least in the United States, they stand to gain most from this boon since they’ll be double-dipping their way to some of that 4X growth predicted by Juniper in their report.

For Dip 1, it will cost brands more to send these richer engagements across the texting network (Textnet? TheNextwork? Still working on ideas.) through the various third party mass texting platforms that enable them. Because the platform rates will go up on a per-message basis as well to cover the increased carrier fees. Hmmm.

And for Dip 2, carriers will quietly pass additional fees on to consumers on their monthly bills. That old “text and data fees may apply” disclaimer is now going to cost a titch more than it used to the more you start opting in for these newer, brighter, more colorful and more animated engagements. The fees will be nominal to each consumer, but across these networks of hundreds of millions of subscribers, it will amount to some delicious over-the-transom revenue from both sides of the marketing equation. And with no additional infrastructure costs.

Well done, you sneaky little bastards.

Five Reasons for a Delta/AT&T cobrand

Nader Ashway2 Comments

delta_att_logos

If you’re a business traveler who spends any appreciable time traveling, you understand the typical challenges: commercial transportation, even in its most streamlined forms, can be a lot of work. Especially if you’ve got a lot of work to do while you travel.

Some commercial carriers now offer wi-fi as a feature of their offerings. In particular, Delta Airlines touts that they proudly offer wi-fi on all flights (with a few restrictions based on the aircraft used on certain legs.)

Unfortunately, the wi-fi offered is painfully slow and doesn’t perform in any manner even remotely resembling acceptable. In some cases, the wi-fi isn’t available at all. This is especially infuriating on longer flights – like New York to Seattle, for instance – when you hope to strike several items from your to-do list, and make those hours productive.

We understand why Delta would offer wi-fi (through a fulfillment partner Gogo Inflight) services. It’s a great way to differentiate from competitors, and it gives the brand another feature to promote to consumers. And not just about targeting business travelers – even today’s average non-business traveler is in need of good wi-fi.

But when Delta can’t deliver on even the most basic version of that promise, they are losing esteem in the minds of their consumers, (this one included,) and thereby damaging their brand in the process.

This is a perfect market condition for a cobranding opportunity. If Delta dumps Gogo and partners with AT&T to deliver on an important and desirable brand feature, everybody wins. Let’s explore how.

Here’s loosely how it works: AT&T wires up all Delta flights with soon-to-be-ubiquitous 5G broadband wireless (serious network capability that’s actually really fast even when everyone is connected,) and now that they own it, AT&T can even deploy their DirecTV service into the flights where there are screens on the seats.  Great way to preview the new network, and better way to innovate (since you’d have to be creative with how to get good-sized beacons into typically tight spaces with the rest of the avionics configuration) on the installation.

What might happen in such an arrangement? The answers are five good reasons Delta and AT&T should cobrand:

  1. Consumers would enjoy a far better, far more productive online experience while flying Delta. If you’ve ever had to deal with slow or spotty wi-fi, you know how frustrating it can be. Smooth and fast connectivity that allows business people to connect to emails or shared docs and enables kids to stream movies would simply make for a stronger overall experience while flying Delta.

  2. Those consumers would form positive brand impressions about both Delta and AT&T. Smooth flights with lots of productive connectivity and streamed entertainment options that are delivered without incident looks good on both brands. This is especially true for AT&T, who is in a near-constant dogfight with Verizon for perceptual wireless network preference.

  3. Delta gets to deliver a category differentiating benefit at no carried or additional operational costs. Without assuming massive operational dollars to implement this arrangement, Delta would leapfrog its competitors with this feature. Sure, JetBlue has in-flight entertainment (ironically delivered by DirecTV,) and sometimes wi-fi, but a fully thought-out super high speed network for everyone to share would help the brand stand apart from its national rivals like United and American in a meaningful – consumers actually desire this feature – and powerful way.

  4. Although AT&T would assume the operational costs of outfitting every Delta jet with their hardware, the brand would receive (basically) free exposure to Delta’s 180 million yearly passengers. Yup I said 180 million. That’s a lot of top-of-the-funnel preference for nearly all of AT&T’s business units built around the network. If they want to beat Verizon’s brains in, getting in front of 180 million passengers and basically making their travel day is a really fine way to start. How about leveraging that exposure with juicy offers to switch to AT&T wireless for your mobile phone service, or similar offers for Sunday Ticket and other DirecTV enticements?  Did I mention 180 million passengers per year?

  5. Both brands would enjoy the benefits of individualized responsibility. Under this arrangement, Delta would only be responsible to its consumers for on-time flight performance and in-cabin service, and NOT the quality or uptime of its wi-fi. When it’s co-branded with a reputable and well-known name, Delta can actually get away with saying the wi-fi is “AT&T’s problem.” With Gogo, (a smaller player with far less brand visibility,) the average passenger assumes it’s Delta’s wi-fi. Conversely, AT&T gets to take all the credit for great wi-fi and entertainment and none of the guff for flight performance or on-time arrivals. A win/win indeed.

While we’re matchmaking, I might also propose that Amtrak and Verizon enter into the same type of arrangement. Have you ever tried to connect using AmtrakConnect? As they say in the business, “oy.”

Now that the business end is settled, all we need is a good tagline. Any ideas?

Sprint and Verizon: balls to balls, toe to toe

Nader AshwayLeave a comment

Coke and Pepsi. McDonald’s and Burger King. Mac and PC. Hertz and Avis. In the history of advertising, there have been some pretty great one-on-one battles waged for attention and preference in various categories.

In the recent battle for supremacy among wireless service providers, the conversation has seemed to focus on network performance. Verizon’s work with Ricky Gervais pokes fun at how the other networks’ “coverage maps” are a joke.

Then, things heated up when Verizon launched their “colorful balls” spot, which then garnered near-immediate responses from both T-Mobile and Sprint. (Almost simultaneously.)

In the latest skirmish among these two rivals, Sprint has fired the loudest shot against Verizon in a long time – employing Verizon’s long-time “can you hear me now” pitchman Paul Marcarelli.

Back in 2002, Verizon launched this campaign to make the case for their “go-everywhere” coverage, and in the process, made Marcarelli a household face and voice. (It was widely reported that for the nine years he was employed by Verizon – and their agency – he was both handsomely paid, and severely restricted from pitching ANY other brands.)

However, Verizon abandoned that campaign around 2012, and Marcarelli faded into the advertising shadows.

That is, until Sprint decided to bring him back this week.

Sure, this is a gut shot at Verizon, only because Marcarelli was SO recognizable as the “Verizon guy.” Plus, the script is written specifically around him – a fictitious character, I may remind you – first, and around network coverage second.

A couple of things are interesting about this spot, especially in the way it’s channeling the legendary “we’re #2” ethos. Sprint never says “we’re the best” or “we’re the fastest.” In fact, they say they’re about 1% smaller than Verizon, but that Verizon costs nearly twice as much. Pretty good claim if that means anything to you.

Here’s the important question we should be asking: Why isn’t any one of these brands (not just Sprint and Verizon, but T-Mobile and AT&T as well,) looking to differentiate on some other attribute? Is “network performance” really that important? (Some select research must say yes, otherwise we wouldn’t see billions spent against it.)

If you look back at the classic examples (like Coke and Pepsi or McDonald’s and Burger King,) the brand that came out on top was the one who changed the conversation. Coke and Pepsi beat each other’s brains in for years about “taste,” and then Pepsi took their biggest leap forward when they altered their position to “the choice of a new generation.” (Shifting the conversation away from taste and focusing it on WHO drinks.)

For the big wireless networks, they’re going to continue beating the snot out of each other on “wireless network performance” to the same ends…a ¼-point bump in quarterly performance here, a year-on-year nominal profit margin spike there.

When one of these brands finds a new “voice” and a new position, (hint: it has to really matter for consumers,) I think you’ll see the conversation in the advertising world really start to shift. One of these marketing teams ought to be working on finding that path. Sure, the other brands will follow (almost immediately,) but there will never be a substitute for being first…for zigging when the market zags, and for creating new connections with consumers.

Now That’s Punny!

Nader Ashway2 Comments

If you love advertising, you probably love good writing. Because, after all (with all due respect to the wonderful art directors and designers out there,) the creative side of advertising is, ultimately, a writer’s business.

If you are a fan of advertising history, as I am, you’ll know that, in the early days, clients went to ad agencies for one thing: superior writing. This was, of course, in the age before television, (when eye candy became the commodity of promotion.) But for more than 50 years, newspaper, magazine and radio – and the writers who developed all that copy – ruled the ad world.

In today’s more outsized, outpaced, hypertargeted marketing world, the ad agent has a much more robust toolset. Beyond words, there are pictures, video, and moving pixels virtually everywhere.   (See what I did there?) But if you want to reach consumers, it’s still a few well-orchestrated words that people will ultimately remember.

These days, it seems we’re writing for a different reason. It’s not so much for memorability as much as it is for virality. I would surmise that social media has pervaded the creative process so much that creative teams in agencies large and small sit in meetings and think less “how can we connect to consumers?” and more “what do you think will get shared?”

Let’s look at a few ads that are playing with words, using a sort of snarky pun game to gain some attention.

Sheets Energy Strips started their brand off with some word play in 2011. “I’ve taken a Sheet right in the cockpit.” Just what you want to hear from your pilot, eh?

 

Kmart sought to re-establish itself as a more current brand with some pun humor on their famous “ship my pants” spot from 2013. And whether or not you like this kind of humor, you might actually shit your pants when you hear that it has more than 21 million views on YouTube.

 

Verizon is out with a new campaign (and a corresponding hashtag, I might add) featuring the ever-so-homophonic “half-fast” meme for its Internet products with a “Speed Match” guarantee. Here’s a holiday spot:

 

If you look closely at the examples above, you’ll see an evolution of the form. Sheets simply did a play on words for the sake of it. But there was no real value to the consumer. (There WAS a value to the brand, in that the meme was a good way for consumers to remember the brand name.)

Kmart did a better marketing job, in that they had the fun, and at least communicated an important feature: that you can shop online at Kmart.com, and that they would ship your pants, or your drawers, or your bed. For FREE.

But Verizon seems to be going a step further, and trying to tie in a benefit. Or at least a negatively associated benefit. By playing on the half-fast theme, they’re communicating the important feature of upload speed that matches download speed. (And taking a shot a the “cable connection” competitors who don’t deliver matching speed.) But with the meme, they’re highlighting all the things that you CAN’T do with half-fast connections, like “I’ll be half fast when I’m sharing my photos,” and “I’ll be half fast updating my blog.” And although they’re negatively associated, those are still functional benefits, and they go a lot further with consumers.

Which is why it strikes me that more campaigns aren’t harnessing the power of language to its fullest potential. I see a lot of great work out there – meaning great ideas – but we rarely see a willingness to play with language the way we once did. Where’s the “Snap! Crackle! Pop!” or the “Leggo my Egg’o” lines for breakfast foods? Where’s the “Plop, Plop, Fizz, Fizz?” And heck “Where’s the Beef?”

If you’re going to go for some fun with your next ad, have at it. But note the conventions and craft it to take it up the ladder and deliver some actual value – like a benefit – to the consumer while you have your pun and eat it too…or something like that.