It’s come and gone—again.
The football game was pretty good. But I can’t say the same for the ads. They were kind of boring. At least they weren’t as entertaining as they have been in the past. And they weren’t THAT good in the past, come to think of it. A few were.
On average, it costs companies $3 million for each 30 – second slot, to advertise during the Super Bowl
Of course, the biggies that get those slots can afford it. They include Audi, Anheuser-Busch, Coke, Pepsi and Doritos—just to name a few. Oh and how can I forget General Motors, with our taxpayer dollars, soaking up eight 30-second slots?
Being a copywriter, I’ll admit to being something of a marketing snob. The types of Super Bowl ads, such as talking animals, is totally juvenile. However, if it brought in really good sales, it might be worth it. But does it?
Who knows for sure? In direct response advertising we can test and track results. Then we know what works and what doesn’t and we adjust accordingly.
Millward Brown Optimor, the “brand awareness” consultant says that yes, Super Bowl advertisers actually do make out well on rewards.
Could it be? I tend to be skeptical since Millward Brown Optimor was commissioned by the National Football League. And it would be in their best interests to keep the advertisers happy.
All those millions go into making entertaining ads that are clever, shocking, funny and more. However, Advertising Age says, concerning the Super Bowl ad business:
“If viewers like what you depict in your ad, but fail to connect your brand name or your message about the brand, then much of your activity has been wasted…while ‘liking’ has clearly proven to be a strong indicator of creative performance, we have seen that ‘transitory’ liking doesn’t always translate to sales effectiveness.”
And this was Advertising Ages own study.
So, I don’t know for sure, but I have my “marketing snob” opinion. I wouldn’t drop 3 mil. For a 30 second ad meant to entertain rather than sell.
Acknowledgement and kudos to Jack Forde and his Copywriter’s Roundtable #500. We think alike.