Tip: To turn text into a link, highlight the text, then click on a page or file from the list above.
Comments (7)
Anonymous said
at 12:18 am on Mar 18, 2007
The Doritos one was really funny. I thought these would be bad, but they're actually really well done. So, to answer why would the NFL put these ads up, I'd say it's because corporate stiffs in ad agencies aren't nearly as creative as people 'out in the street'....
Anonymous said
at 10:47 pm on Mar 18, 2007
Brands put many limitations on agencies that hinder the creative process. If brands loosened up a bit, they might get more creative concepts from their agencies.
Anonymous said
at 8:22 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I just think that ad agencies are looking at different ways to involve the consumers and create brand interaction. Markets are becoming increasingly fragmented and it is getting much harder to attract customers' attention.
Anonymous said
at 9:35 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I must say that while I like the idea of involving consumers in creation of the ads, this year's crop of ads were in general disappointing compared to previous years i.e. bud bowls. It's more of a gimmic to involve the consumers but the big question is whether or not they were successful. Maybe involving consumers gets them involved with the brand but what they really want is to sell product.
Anonymous said
at 10:20 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I think it comes down to a matter of taste - you might not have liked them, but I thought they were great - better than most of the hugely expensive slick pieces of nothingness you usually see from large corporations. So maybe it depends on who they're trying to reach. (I don't know what the bud bowl is so can't compare....)
Anonymous said
at 10:13 pm on Mar 21, 2007
The Bud Bowl was a series of ads that Budweiser ran in the 90's which many people tuned into the Superbowl to see that ads instead of the game. They were quite successful in the old world of advertising....people remembered them and talked about them (water-cooler talk). Was anyone really talking about this year's crop?
Anonymous said
at 1:15 pm on Mar 29, 2007
i tend to think the consumer generated Ads should not be looked at for the result they produce but for the accidental zeal. I mean, creativity as such may be at par with what agencies can come up with (or not) but I think the edge of this process is accidental trend setting techniques which may spark new cash-cows as they are are inappropriately referred to. The agency-client relationship as such hinders creativity cause the bottlenecks tend to be disconnected executives who in their wildest dreams can not have a grasp on tastes, many different sorts of tastes all continuesly change. I dunno, I think consumer generated ads like the superbowl, can give new insights as to what works and what does not work (at VERY low cost, if they do not work heads will not roll). How could it not work, we generate it after all.
You don't have permission to comment on this page.
Comments (7)
Anonymous said
at 12:18 am on Mar 18, 2007
The Doritos one was really funny. I thought these would be bad, but they're actually really well done. So, to answer why would the NFL put these ads up, I'd say it's because corporate stiffs in ad agencies aren't nearly as creative as people 'out in the street'....
Anonymous said
at 10:47 pm on Mar 18, 2007
Brands put many limitations on agencies that hinder the creative process. If brands loosened up a bit, they might get more creative concepts from their agencies.
Anonymous said
at 8:22 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I just think that ad agencies are looking at different ways to involve the consumers and create brand interaction. Markets are becoming increasingly fragmented and it is getting much harder to attract customers' attention.
Anonymous said
at 9:35 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I must say that while I like the idea of involving consumers in creation of the ads, this year's crop of ads were in general disappointing compared to previous years i.e. bud bowls. It's more of a gimmic to involve the consumers but the big question is whether or not they were successful. Maybe involving consumers gets them involved with the brand but what they really want is to sell product.
Anonymous said
at 10:20 pm on Mar 19, 2007
I think it comes down to a matter of taste - you might not have liked them, but I thought they were great - better than most of the hugely expensive slick pieces of nothingness you usually see from large corporations. So maybe it depends on who they're trying to reach. (I don't know what the bud bowl is so can't compare....)
Anonymous said
at 10:13 pm on Mar 21, 2007
The Bud Bowl was a series of ads that Budweiser ran in the 90's which many people tuned into the Superbowl to see that ads instead of the game. They were quite successful in the old world of advertising....people remembered them and talked about them (water-cooler talk). Was anyone really talking about this year's crop?
Anonymous said
at 1:15 pm on Mar 29, 2007
i tend to think the consumer generated Ads should not be looked at for the result they produce but for the accidental zeal. I mean, creativity as such may be at par with what agencies can come up with (or not) but I think the edge of this process is accidental trend setting techniques which may spark new cash-cows as they are are inappropriately referred to. The agency-client relationship as such hinders creativity cause the bottlenecks tend to be disconnected executives who in their wildest dreams can not have a grasp on tastes, many different sorts of tastes all continuesly change. I dunno, I think consumer generated ads like the superbowl, can give new insights as to what works and what does not work (at VERY low cost, if they do not work heads will not roll). How could it not work, we generate it after all.
You don't have permission to comment on this page.