Of course I have to admit that don’t directly work in marketing, but somehow insulting your potential customer’s perceived sexual shortcomings doesn’t seem like a stroke of genius.
That’s just icky.
Probably the most famous example of this is the 1970 Heinz Great American Soup ad, with Ann Miller and a whole set of Follies girls. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swDzAPvj6k8
A really great ad – very visual, memorable and with some humor.
But sit had problems as an advertisement meant to increase sales:
- The ad cost so much to produce that it used up most of their budget, so there wasn’t enough money left to buy much TV time to show it.
- The ad did inspire housewives to go out and buy soup to serve to their husbands – but when at the store they mostly bought Campbell’s soup in the familiar red & white cans. Whenever Heinz paid to show this ad, their competitor Campbell’s got increased sales.
Sort of the prototype anti-ad:
You blow your budget making an ad so good that every time you broadcast it you increase your competitor’s sales!
(Preface: I do work in advertising…)
Well, I’d ask this:
Are you, or are your nieces, young men between the ages of 18 and 29, who eat at fast-food restaurants more than 3 times a week? (I’m pretty sure that, being “nieces”, the answer to that question is at least partially “no”. 
) I note this because that’s probably a pretty accurate description of Burger King’s target, and that’s likely whom they’re trying to reach with those ads.
IME, in many cases where you (or I, or your aunt Flo) see an ad, and just don’t get it, or feels offended by it, or whatever…part of the issue is that you’re not the intended target for the ad.
The race baiting PSP ads anyone?
(playstation portable)
PSP White ads showed a white woman in all white beating a black woman in all black.
PSP Black ads reversed the situation.
If memory serves the White ads used some power and dominance imagery while the Black ads made it more like sexual assault.
Especially since the logo in the lower right corner looks like a cartoon mouth opening up for…
…nevermind. :rolleyes:
I will actually go out of my way NOT to buy Charmin anymore because of these ads. There’s other TP I like better anyway, but I WILL NOT buy it no matter how good a sale it is.
Care to enlighten the rest of us? To a non-Swedish speaker, all I see is a pretty lady with a nice voice singing, and then a panel at the end of what I assume are some sort of beauty products.
I must admit to not understanding this line of reasoning. If I preferred Charmin, I’d buy Charmin; if I preferred another brand I’d buy the other brand. The commercial doesn’t really enter into my decision.
Not that I’m a fan of these particular ads, but I just kind of ignore them and get on with my life.
Maybe it’s just that I’m not very easily offended, shocked, or grossed out. I can’t imagine a TV commercial having such an effect on me that I’d actively avoid a product.
I don’t know…it was a memorable campaign, and I think Burger King’s big problem the last…decade…has been that nobody thinks of them. FWIW, the story behind the campaign is pretty funny – someone apparently found the “creepy King” (as the ads are apparently called) mask on eBay. Supposedly, in the 70s, it was briefly a cheap freebie, and the guy at the ad agency recognized the sheer…unnerving-ness of it.
I dunno, I don’t eat at Burger King much, but I do find the ads clever.
Katriona said:
Along those lines, during the Battlestar Galactica final season run, there was a tie in campaign with KFC. So there was a commercial during the show to text and win prizes from the show (props and stuff). The campaign was called, “The KFC Frak Pack”. That lasted IIRC 1 episode, was missing for a week, then came back as the “Can’t Say That Word on Television” campaign.
Which is doubly amusing.
- Frak means Fuck. So they were trying for a hip tie in to the show using a catchy word that rhymes with pack, and ended up advertising a KFC Fuck Bucket.
- “Frak” explicitly can be said on television. It was aired in the original Battlestar Galactica, much less the newer version. However, it is an incredibly stupid use to put it advertising a box of food. Unless you’re trying to convey “Hey, order this combination of food, and we’ll throw in a staff member. For a limited time only.”
Indyellen said:
I don’t understand the problem. I mean, it’s not like they’re showing you a stripe of brown on the paper, or demonstrating the use. I don’t understand what’s offensive about it. Yeah, they’re bears using TP, but that’s just silly, not gross.
Larry Mudd said:
Sounds like they might be trying to imply a double meaning for the word “ventured”, something like:
Nothing attempted, nothing exciting happens.
But yeah, doesn’t come across well.
kenobi 65 said:
Well, I may not be 18 - 29 any more or prone to eat burgers 3 times a week, but I can’t see many guys in that demographic excited about the idea of waking up to some creepy big-headed silent King guy sharing your bed. Or hovering around your window. That doesn’t say “Come eat my burgers”, that says “I’m going to jump you when you’re not looking/asleep and do dirty things to you.” I just don’t see that appealing to any audience, except maybe gay guys with a submissive fantasy. “Hey, he’s got a huge head.”
“A huge, shiny plastic head that can neither move, speak, nor assume any human expression besides HA HA I AM GOING TO EAT YOU…”
Ill-fated, most certainly. But ill-conceived? They couldn’t help that the scary new disease kind of swiped their name.
I’m way past 29. The nieces (well, one’s a cousin), are between 12 and 15.
You must be pretty young. “Hold the pickles hold the lettuce special orders don’t upset us…Have It YOUR way.”
And before that: “Fried or flamebroiled?” (or something like that)
Okay, too late to edit, I see I let the above post sit on my computer for too long.
I haven’t eaten at Quizno’s since their “Raised by wolves” ad campaign. I just …cant.
You’re being pretty literal. They’re shooting for making BK feel edgy, risky, and a little naughty, and making it feel like the anti-McDonald’s. And, from what I’ve seen in the research, among that target, they’ve succeeded, at least to an extent.
They’ve been willing to be “out there”, in order to be noticed, because, to be honest, for many years, they weren’t even noticed. The last thing that they’d done that really got any kind of attention was “Herb”, which (a) was a mess of bad attention, and (b) was 24 years ago.
The bigger issue, as I noted upthread, is that it’s not clear that any of that actually has translated to people eating at BK more often.
Exactly. Obviously the King doesn’t get guys turned on or whatever, but it does appeal to a pretty common sense of humor (lots of guys dressed up as the King for Halloween when I was in college, for instance) and BK must be seeing some results from the campaign if they’ve kept it going for several years.
Most of the posts in this thread are just “commercials I don’t like,” and the demographic of this message board largely isn’t the demographic these ads are targeting anyway. The campaigns that are actually ill-conceived are the ones that have to be pulled (“I’d hit it”) or that measurably drive customers en masse to a competitor.
18 - 29 year old male here who eats fast food at least once a week, and let me tell you, the BK ads work. No, when I see them I don’t instantly go, “I want Burger King.” But ads aren’t supposed to do that. Instead they’re clever and interesting and they put BK in your mind, so it works. It works a lot better than “have it your way,” because you can have it your way at ANY fast food place. Despite what the ads have you believe, the sandwiches are not premade at McDonalds.
And anyone who thinks the Axe ads are ill-conceived needs to walk through the halls of a high school sometime. I’m surprised the Axe execs aren’t Bill Gates-rich.
I love it.