I feel the advertisers at the super bowl spent there money wisely. If anything they acomplished some brand recognition.
Even if many of the people watching the super bowl have no internet access they will remember the name when and if they do.
I feel anything that has your name offline is great because many may think you are larger than you really are because you have moved from the web to everywhere someone may be.
DLJDirect.com summed it up pretty good, "Why would we want to waste money buying ad time during the Superbowl, when we could invest that money in our clients?" So, they offered free trades for the duration of the Superbowl.
Something just tells me that if maybe half the people watching the event can even acces your "store" and then if even fewer of those people can actually use your investment service, that my ad money is better spent elsewhere.
My two cents
------------------ http://www.CandMWebDesign.com - The best in web site design, maintenance, marketing, and development
The only thing that will make it worthwhile is if they can generate more than 2 million worth of new sales directly related to those ads. Brand Recognition is probably one of the biggest things a company can get.
What are the first companies to pop in your head when you hear the following words:
soda, chocolate, beer, cars, potato chips, delivered pizza.
For most people in the US its going to be:
Coke, Hershey's, Budweiser, Ford or GM, Lays and Dominoes. Of course there are runner-ups as well such as Pepsi, Nestle (actually owns half of the brand name groceries in your supermarket), Coors, Toyata, Ruffles (Owned by Frito-Lay, which in turn is owned by Pepsi) and Pizza Hut (Also owned by Pepsi).
The point is this, Coca-Cola is Number one is Soft Drink sales and has several good name brands (Coke, Sprite, Minute Maid). Pepsi is number 2 in Soft Drink sales but is a much larger company and overall has more well known products including Pepsi, Doritos, Lays, Ruffles, Fritos, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried chicken and others. Pepsi spent billions building up a series of brand names and Coca-Cola spent billions of dollars refining their product and relying on their trademark signature. Which is more profitable?
Those two million dollar commercials are only going to generate profit and name brand recognition if they are continually shown to the public in the next six months, otherwise they are a waste of advertising dollars because no one will remember them in six months.
------------------
Wayne Luke
Internet Media Provider
[This message has been edited by wluke (edited February 10, 2000).]
Don't know about that but I could check because I work right across the street from Nestle world headquarters in Glendale, Ca. and ride the train to work with a lot of their employees.
------------------
Wayne Luke
Internet Media Provider
I must say that if you don't know something you can bet the wluke has the answere. I appreaciate all of the comments that wluke and others have posted on the forums.
Wluke is the man. By the way Wluke where do you have the time to know a little of everything?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks