TV Adverts

Feel better now?

quote:

Originally posted by Mike-B:

If you post images from other forums, or from places that either need passwords, or block linking then others will not see the images. Flickr would appear to block image linking, I just see that empty square.

You will probably see the image yourself as both the image and path are cached in your temporary internet files folder.

Everyone does it from time to time, one of the most common ones here is images from the Steve Hoffman forum that have their patch copied. They show to the poster for the above reason, but are blank to anyone who has not visited that page on the other forum.

Amazon is one of the best sources for images, google image search is good, but will not always allow the full size image to be linked.

Hope that helps.

quote:

JamieL_v2

Whooops doing 3 things at once & answering phones - men don't do multi-tasking
The real post is now at the thread top

Hi Mike,

As I mentioned in the BBC thread, we record the bulk of the TV we watch and are then able to fast forward the ads. This makes for a much more pleasant viewing experience - although there is more wear and tear on the remote and its batteries.

Brad

We like Oficer DBL, time shift the vast majority of out TV viewing, so adverts get seen at 30x speed using SKY+ box fast forward.
BBC programmes are the only ones that could be watched "live". We even time shift live sports to try and avoid ads.

The sense of such adverts is presumably to make you remember the brand. Looks like it works.

Maybe when you are casting around for the name of an insurance website it will now be the one you recall first.

Bruce

The late great David Ogilvy, who (along with Bill Bernbach) was the father of post-war advertising, would have deplored the kind of ads Mike-B is talking about.

Ogilvy understood that you had to seduce the consumer, not bore or bludgeon him or her. He detested billboards - he thought them a blight on the landscape, ill-mannered, intrusive and garish. He didn't care much for TV either (although he did come round eventually). Print was his medium, and the ads he created for Rolls-Royce, Schweppes, Dove and Hathaway Shirts were some of the most effective - and subtle - ads ever created.

Ogilvy understood that the "hard sell" rarely works. Poor old guy must be turning in his grave.

Disclosure: I work at an ad agency

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:
The sense of such adverts is presumably to make you remember the brand. Looks like it works.

Maybe when you are casting around for the name of an insurance website it will now be the one you recall first.

Bruce

Too true Bruce. Advertising works, which is why companies and brands shell out billions for it each year. Anyone who says they aren't aqffected in any way by advertising is, quite frankly, fibbing.

Just to remind you all, by way of transparency, that I work at an ad agency!

quote:

Disclosure: I work at an ad agency Cool Winker

You should be ashamed then!
I suppose you could be car salesman or an MP.

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:

You should be ashamed then!
I suppose you could be car salesman or an MP.

Well, before entering the glamorous world of advertising I was a journalist, so I guess I've always been a bit of a low-life.

Things could be much worse though, as you point out. I could be an estate agent, a chugger or, worst of all, work in procurement!

Even the kids reach for the rremote when that imbesilic gocomapre advert starts to appear on the screen. We have taken the chance to teach the dog how to howl at it to - which does make us smile.
I was begining to wonder if I was the only one who actively avoids companies who give us such an idiotic tirade of so called adverts. While many are now 'company aware' - it has to be asked how many consider said company to be worthy of their business. For me - not in my lifetime, no matter what. At least the finance company now has its own channel which seems easy to avoid.

quote:

teach the dog how to howl at it

Does the RSPCA know about this.
Even dogs have feelings & the need for mute buttons you know

Interestingly, that Go Compare ad was done in-house (ie by the company itself, rather than an ad agency). The ad was actually voted "the most annoying of 2009", and the MD of Go Compare has pronounced himself satisfied as a result - but the increased awareness of his brand hasn't resulted in increased market share or sales AFAIK.

By far the most successful ad of last year - ie, in terms of it translating into increased sales - was the meerkat ads for comparethemarket.com, created by VCCP.

Two of the most admired, and most-awarded ads of recent years, the Cadbury "Gorilla" and Sony "Balls", interestingly didn't make that much difference to sales of either brand.

Advertising's sometimes a very hit and miss game - unless you have a very powerful insight, it may not always work.

That Md needs to be made to drive round an endless loop of road full of sleeping policemen, whilst listening to his advert for the rest of his natural life.
How you can be 'satisfied' with alienating virtually every person who has the misfortune to hear it is beyond me. His name wan't 'Ratner' was it?

I usually manage to "zone out" during the ads, but to be fair, there is the compensation of the occasional classic. Remember the "Guinness" dance, or the current "Meerkat.com" campaign?

I think my all-time favourite was one car ad (can't remember the car) which extolled the virtues of the calming effect this vehicle would have if you had to sit still during a never-ending motorway traffic jam.

Unintentionally hilarious. But then, being a cyclist, I would say that, wouldn't I? (with apologies to Mandy Rice-Davis).

quote:

Originally posted by Steve2701:
That Md needs to be made to drive round an endless loop of road full of sleeping policemen, whilst listening to his advert for the rest of his natural life.
How you can be 'satisfied' with alienating virtually every person who has the misfortune to hear it is beyond me. His name wan't 'Ratner' was it?

Calm down dear, it's only...

I find the benefits of advertising and it's cousins branding and marketing to be generally much less than the costs.

At it base level, advertising can make consumers aware of the choices. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Branding can provide clues about quality that might not be readily discernable otherwise. e.g. The quality of Nike t-shirt might be hard to tell from a cheaper one in the store; but the brand gives you confidence that it is of a certain quality that, for you, might be worth the extra price.

Beyond that, it is pretty much all downhill. Vast sums of money spent in bamboozling the public and grabbing for their cash. No net gain. We'd all be better of wothout this IMHO.

Corprate sponsorship of events is one of the most insidious forms of this inefficient re-distribution of value. If there was no corporate sponsorship of sporting or cultural events, you could argue that the ticket prices would be higher as a consequence, but I'd counter that costs would be lower. Why are the salaries for football players so high? Because the money is available to pay them. Take away the sponsorship and they'd just get paid less. Would the football be any less entertaining? Would F1 be less exciting if you reduced the team budgets by 50% (or 90%)? We're all paying the salaries and costs through increased prices on the sponsors' products, why not pay them directly through ticket sales? Or not pay it at all and reduce the costs of these spectacles.

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:
The sense of such adverts is presumably to make you remember the brand. Looks like it works.

Maybe when you are casting around for the name of an insurance website it will now be the one you recall first.

Bruce

The purpose of advertising is simple:-
Love or hate the advertisement - you still remember them.

Win win for the advertisers.

quote:

you still remember them

WRONG ..........
I might remember them, but for sure I remember to AVOID them.

WIN WIN for me LOOSE LOOSE for them

I avoid adverts and am not influenced by them in any way. Simples.

I would rather give away my car or set it alight than sell it to the company who claim to buy any car.

A few years ago I was stopped in the street by a market researcher. They were checking on the success or otherwise of beer adverts.

"Are you a beer drinker?"
"Yes, actually I'm a member of CAMRA"
"Oh good, do you mind answering a few questions about beer advertising?"
"No, go on"
"Would you say that you are influenced by any of the beer adverts to try a brand?"
"No, I generally stick to beer brewed by small breweries who have little or no advertising budget"
"Oh, how do you hear about them then?"
"From what's available at my local - if I see a beer I haven't tried before I'll try a pint. Or beer festivals or word of mouth recommendations from other beer drinking friends..."
"Oh, can you tell me about any beer adverts that you have seen then?"
"There was that one with Peter Kay in it..."
"What beer was that for?"
"No idea. There was the one with a bear in it"
"What beer was that for?"
"No idea. There was..."

I'm with the general opinion of detesting the lot and avoiding them wherever possible. We do the fast forward bit too.

As for remembering the names. Nope and I try deliberately to forget them too.

The one TV ad I did admire was the Honda Kerplunk one. That was clever, but I still wouldn't ever buy a Honda car though.

steve

I do hope that they make a movie with the Meercats, there is an Iphone app, with 'outtakes'. They are just brilliant.

If an advert annoys me enough, I will avoid the product. I got car insurance quotes from Churchill and Direct Line recently, I did not bother with 'Go Compare' on principal of their advert makes me dive for the remote if I miss fast forwarding through it, I then asked my usual insurer if they could match the best quote I got, and they did.

The Halifax adverts are very interesting, it says a lot about the company. They use a number of individuals to make up a letter. What this says is that we have no interest in individuals, we are only interested in how they make up something abstract that is useful to us. I wonder how Howard is, ha, ha, ha, ha.

On the other hand there is one product I am very loyal to, and the advertisers know who I am, what I watch, and exactly how to reassure me that I want to continue to buy it, VW Golfs. I have owned three cars, they have all been Golfs, and I am looking to buy another one. I also love their adverts. The one a few years ago where a man walked around his house slamming doors, then ended up with the sound of the Golf door 'thunking' heavily into place was just right.

I did try one of the Golf's main competitors, but when I closed the door my friend, a mechanic, who went with me to look at cars said the look of disgust on face was something to behold.

I also love the miserable expression on the face of the actress in the current 'Like a Golf' advert.

I have been fortunate to have been able to draw one line for the last ten years, I will not work on adverts. If you think the adverts themselves are annoying, you should try being in a room with the a**holes who make them. With the current situation on TV and film production, this is a luxury I might have to give up, but I don't think I will mince my words if one of those g*ts try to get me to play around with stupid ideas that are wasting my time, while drinking wine or beer while I am trying to work. At least I will not have to put up with them lighting up without asking in the work place any more.

I will happily work on any Meercat or Golf adverts though, I should be so lucky.