I do not understand. Advertisers spend millions of dollars for a 30 seconds or 1 minute spot in a football game yet in many cases do not reach an online tracking.
I mean, if you want to spend that much money to get your product visible, you will not save it somehow?
In this article I'll discuss some of the shortcomings of a campaign for Super Bowl, and I think advertisers should do about it.
So the Super Bowl 40 (XL sorry) has come and gone. Like many others, I naturally saw the game. Not so much for the game, but for advertising.
You see, Super Bowl Sunday is the time of year when many companies start their annual advertising program begins with an inaugural Super Bowl commercial.
And like every year the usual suspects were there - Budweiser, GoDaddy, Pepsi and Coca-Cola to name but a few years.
Now there are some interesting things that occurred with this ad. For one thing, there was a lot of accommodation properties online ads. Last year there were only a handful, but this year the big names like Yahoo and Google entered the ads.
Even the website of the NFL had ads on its site appears immediately after the match.
But what confuses me is that none of these advertisers (except perhaps for GoDaddy) attempted to link offline advertising during the game with everything they did online.
For example, if you take a look at some of Pepsi, Coca-Cola or Budweiser sites before the game, you will not find mention of the Super Bowl. Pizza Hut has a job a little better with the boots givaway Jessica Simpson was on the mall, but that's all.
In the era of multi-platform marketing, I am surprised that none of these places have really tried to create a buzz leading up to Super Bowl with their websites.
In addition, there was a slight change in these areas during the game or even after. It's like advertising during the game happens in a vacuum without regard to other media.
Admittedly, they spend millions for the right to have their ads broadcast during the game, but because I think spending a few thousand to ensure that the site helps to further promote their message would be in order.
In fact, it always bothered me when a company makes television commercials and the site does not reflect the message in advertising. There are some cases where I found the site and advertising work well together.
GEICO, for example, does an excellent job of linking their TV ads on their website. When you go to one of the first things you see is the Gecko - their mascot.
So if Geico can not do it, why do not other companies?
So if you look at the web Coca Cola and Pepsi to see them keep up the brand, but that's all they are doing. Not seem to reflect the current TV promotion.
So, while I was inspired by ads that weekend, I was a little disappointed because it's all those - individual bits of entertainment little residual value because they do not tie into other forms of promotion. In fact, on their website.
Really, if you consider companies like other contagious Web TV - television over the border and work with Web features, such as AOL and Yahoo will begin to wonder why the advertisers are better integrated.
I think maybe it has to do with marketing, and that they are not yet fully get the Internet. They know that customers need a website, but some people still do not know why.
Many marketing executives understand the value of any online marketing, although it is easier to measure SEM campaign than any TV advertising campaign. With SEM and SEO and pay, you can monitor and measure the impressions of visitors and conversions. When the TV is all you get is an estimate of the entire head.
So there is no Super Bowl advertisers, who can read this please listen to this - so that the campaign really happened, why not integrate a groped part of the marketing message? You might be surprised at what has happened.
No comments:
Post a Comment