In Response to Joseph Maturo's Post: Superbowl 2013 Commercials

Question: Do you think that it is worth these companies paying all this money for a commercial during the Superbowl? What is your opinions on this year's Superbowl commercials?


I would like to say that the money that these companies spend on their time slot for their products are worth it, but I don't believe many of the commercials will persuade customers to buy their product. For the most part Superbowl commercials are focused on laughs and entertainment value instead of the product itself. Many customers will go away remembering the funniest commercial because of the plot of the commercial, but not really remember the product the Ad was for. The Ad's are set out to be memorable, to have customers talking about their brand and therefore promote sales, but instead customers interests start and end with the commercial. Basically I don't know anyone that enjoyed one of the Superbowl commercials that then motivated them to go out and by a product they had never tried before. Superbowl commercials may help persuade current customers to remain loyal to their brands but I do not believe they'd do much more than that. If companies used their expensive time slots to inform new customers as to what benefits their product had while juggling the entertainment value, only then would I say their money was well spent.


Has a funny/entertaining Ad that focused more on a short story/event then the product itself ever persuade you to buy a certain product?

NBA All-Star Weekend: too many Ad's?

Last night was the official start of this year's NBA All-Star Weekend, and the sponsors of the events are clearly apparent, not only from the signs and game floor stickers, but to the name of the events themselves, such as the Sprite Slam Dunk Contest to the BBVA Compass Rising Stars challenge. It's understandable that companies want a stake in these highly watched events, but I believe that in some cases the advertising has gone too far.

Back in 2011, the moment from the weekend that everyone was talking about was Blake Griffin's two-handed dunk over a "car", or at least to me that's what KIA and Sprite wanted you to believe. However what I saw was him jump over the front bumper. Not to say this isn't an incredible feat in itself, but I believe the fact that the car was one of the main sponsor's of the event swayed the vote in Griffin's favor. Prior to Blake Griffin's Dunk the car drove out onto the court with prestige and an entire chorus was present singing as it entered. In an event that has a well established history from Dr. J and Micheal Jordan's free-throw lime dunks, 5'7" Spud  Webb's 360 dunk, to Vince Carter's 360 windmill, I believe that Blake Griffin jumping over his sponsor's car was in a way a cop-out. The other contestants in the 2011 competition stayed relatively true to the event, and one participant in particular showed more athleticism than the winner by dunking 3 basketballs, and also dunking on two hoops at once. With advertising creeping more and more into these events, I begin to wonder if the only way an athlete may win is with the help of their sponsors to create an eccentric brand infused dunk. Is it possible it could get as bad where athletes may not even dunk a ball but instead a box of Cheez-its, or dunk while applying their speed-stick deodorant?

Has their been a specific event or show where you felt the advertising began to effect the experience or outcome of the event?