no offense to Crispin, but i really can't find the value in this ad. It may be driving buzz within all the bloggers, but its not driving sales.
Quoted in a Wall Street Journal article..."The fact that they have the blogs, the business community and mass media talking about it means they hit a nerve," says Allen Adamson, managing director of the New York office of Landor Associates, a corporate branding firm owned by WPP Group. And there is this lovely quote too..."The initial reaction might be on the fence or leaning negative but the ad did its job," says Dean Crutchfield, a brand consultant. "Most companies would have to spend a billion dollars on advertising to get this kind of attention."
Really? Brands would spend a billion dollars for this crap--negative buzz even though it's buzz? Honestly? Explain, how this negative buzz converts into affinity and sales for the brand???
Posts
1 comment:
Adam,
Glad you posted your opinions on the Microsoft ad featuring Jerry Seinfeld. Here is my quick assessment as to why this campaign is brilliant.
When you envision Microsoft, you think "PC" from the Apple commercials. You visualize PC as the nerdy, binary, frustrated clumsy intellectual who just can't match the hipness of Mac culture.
What this commercial demonstrated, was that with one 60 second spot, the PC/Mac campaign became old hat. The objective as I can only assume was to remove the image of Microsoft as "PC Guy" and replace him with Jerry Seinfeld.
Hit or miss, their objective worked.
Post a Comment