Better Than Any Amount Of Cannes Lions …
21 Comments so far
Leave a comment
October 9, 2010, 3:55 pm
Filed under: Comment
Filed under: Comment
Proof that Old Spice reaches the parts, even Katy Perry can’t quite get too …
21 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Youre saying planning is child’s play?
Comment by John October 9, 2010 @ 4:03 pmDoesn’t everyone?
Comment by Rob October 9, 2010 @ 4:19 pmSo it appears you’ve decided to come back and blog Rob. Wasn’t worth the wait.
Nice sesame street thing, better acting and more believable product claims too.
Comment by DH October 9, 2010 @ 4:32 pmYou really are aspiring to Andy’s seat at the table aren’t you Dave …
Saying that, you’re right … at least on the anti-climatic “return” of my blogposts, even my Mum is probably nodding her head in agreement. As for the over-enthusiastic product claims, we should talk to Billy because I would lay money that he’s been coating himself from head to toe in Old Spice and AXE in an attempt to increase his odds of getting laid.
When will he learn that even smelling like a man can’t overcome having the personality of an accountant?!
Comment by Rob October 9, 2010 @ 4:55 pmold spice and axe. beware billy, it seems youll end up on a cow when you smell like a monster.
Comment by peggy October 10, 2010 @ 9:13 pmhes been doing that for fucking years. explains why his favourite nursery rhyme is old mcdonald had a fucking farm.
oi campbell, does this mean your daily brain draining bollocks has started again? well thats fucking weekend ruined.
Comment by andy@cynic October 10, 2010 @ 9:35 pmrumour has it this was james camerons first attempt at his overlong, underwitten avatar movie bollocks.
its good to have you back campbell. except it isnt.
Comment by andy@cynic October 10, 2010 @ 12:07 ami know that i’m not one of the ones who ‘get’s it’. and maybe this is why:
i always thought that appropriation just mean that the format of the ad – the style and the dialogue – is good and can be translated to anything, even a sesame street ad.
and, therefore, it’s not actually good branding because it’s not so intrinsically bound up with the product that you can’t have it with anything else. but, i’m probably well-wrong.
isn’t a blue monster on a horse by the sea just like a gorilla on a drumkit in a purple room?
now can you go back to your holidays, please?
Comment by lauren October 11, 2010 @ 2:00 amfunny you would mention gorilla lauren. heres my two cents. because so far, it has always escaped me why gorilla is seen as a great piece of advertising/branding. its got nothing to do with the product at all. at least from my pov. and joy is bmw anyway 😉 i think gorilla got more to do with cunninghams monkey drummer than chocolate. no offence, mr cabral.
the os ad is about the smell though, which is intrinsic to the product and framed in the ad (or something lol). id argue the sesame street ad as earned media is not really working that well without knowing the os one. but as soon as you know them both, theres the extra layer of cross referencing. arguable though if its great to have advertising (for adolescents/adults) programmed onto children’s sub-/consciousness. thats the beef id have with it. hello ms klein, mr bogusky.
Comment by peggy October 11, 2010 @ 4:03 amI hate Gorilla. Just saying …
Comment by Rob October 11, 2010 @ 5:23 pmThere’s masses of IPA data that proves fame campaigns are the most effective (but bear in mind their agenda of course)so there’s a case to ‘just making your advertising something people talk about’
Comment by northern October 11, 2010 @ 4:57 pmThe gorilla can be defended for it’s short to medium term effect – it was developed specifically to build share with kids around impulse SKU’s – get top of mind, and it contributed to 9% share.
But it failed Millward Brown’s link test, but when it was tested for how it made people feel, it was off the scale.
My only question is over longer term – people will remember talking about that ad, rather than the product.
I think Old Spice is different since people talk about the Old Spice guy – and it’s part of a much wider campaign and thought that includes the original Bruce Whatsiface stuff that I personally prefer (and a rock solid, ownable brand truth).
Just out of interest, I saw some decent research from Brainjuicer that showed that how and ad makes you feel is more important over time that any message
While I agree with you re Old Spice, you’ve made me realize I’ve yet to hear anyone on the street talk about it over here.
As for the Gorilla’s 9%, I still say that’s never been proven and many one-off factors were at play.
Comment by John October 11, 2010 @ 5:07 pmOf course they were, it never works in isolation, but I still maintain, as a stunt, not an ad, a stunt, it was massively effective
Comment by northern October 11, 2010 @ 5:23 pmAs I said, I hate Gorilla …
Comment by Rob October 11, 2010 @ 5:23 pmLovely. Sesame street always seems to get parody spot on.
Comment by Rob Mortimer October 11, 2010 @ 7:37 pmLook, if I was a client and someone – someone with a huge global presence – did a nice parody of something I’d done … generating millions of dollars of free media to a huge group of people both geographically and socially AND reignited positive conversations around my brand … I’d be rather chuffed.
And the best bit, is if no one buys a single pack of Old Spice because of it, it doesn’t actually matter because this is a byproduct of your work, not the goal.
Of course, selling stuff is quite important and there’s a bunch of factors that go into it – of which advertising plays a part in that – but whereas Gorilla had [in my mind] the most generic/tenuous [delete as appropriate] link to the brand, the Old Spice campaign doesn’t/didn’t and as such, this parody brings back the meaning of the campaign rather than purely the execution.
Well that’s what I’d suggest Britton [Old Spice planning show off] say’s to the client anyway, hahaha.
Comment by Rob October 11, 2010 @ 7:48 pmBut when you’re the market leader, don’t you have the scope to ‘own’ the category generic? And I’d argue that owning a genuine, unstoppable smile that comes with that element of surprise of far from generic – unfortunately, that’s hard to repeat, as Fallon have proved.
Comment by northern October 11, 2010 @ 8:31 pmWhile I’m at it, you might as well have a go at balls -what’s really differentiating about having decent colour?
Interesting point. Nothing at all really, but in a market where the average person doesn’t know which products are best, being the first brand that comes to mind for colour is likely to be an advantage.
Comment by Rob Mortimer October 11, 2010 @ 9:01 pmballs was fucking balls wasnt it. and campbell did wipe a streak of shit over it so at least hes fair in his viciousness.
a market leader has a lot more scope to do stuff, even generic bollocks but when its done to please their ego thats when they run the risk of getting taken into a dark corner and smacked in the mouth by some chinese or korean or californian fucker who is hungrier to win and more in touch with whats wanted. or in apples case, can make it prettier.
Comment by andy@cynic October 11, 2010 @ 9:17 pmi’m sure all the numbers add up. otherwise you plannery types wouldn’t make these kinds of ads anymore.
it’s just that i’m not so convinced as to their relevance for product. i still quote, remember and reference ads from the 80s (imperial leather – tahiti would be nice) and yet have never bought a bar of their soap.
however, as strategy for art making? bring it. if half the artists of the world could learn from what you kids do when you make stuff to not sell products, the world would be a better place.
Comment by lauren October 12, 2010 @ 5:50 amimperial leather? theyd sell more if they made s&m gear.
Comment by andy@cynic October 12, 2010 @ 6:37 am