theprof00 said:
not everything is about showing games and price. This is what I think you are maybe misunderstanding. There are many ways to accomplish one objective.
This ad was a good ad however,
It took a full minute (vs ten seconds), and they advertised something they didn't have (HOME)
I am sorry but until you get over the fact that youtube is not a good venue for showing commercials we cannot keep debating civilly. Movement has begun to put commercials before youtube videos, and adding overlay watermarks, like what ign does. Those are commercials targetting you.
I'm going to try to explain it simpler:
If someone pops out at you from behind a door in an empty room and scares you you are going to say "AAAAAHHHH" (advertising metaphor) If you just walked into a haunted house in a theme park you are going to be in an already aroused state and expecting something to pop out. (going on youtube to specifically watch a commercial metaphor)
Anticipation vs surprise; it is proven that surprise beats anticipation almost across the board in every aspect.
also, in the end, those are just teasers. According to the mere exposure effect, audience members are more likely to become readily attached and influenced by something that they have unconciously seen 10-20 times previously.
|
How else am I supposed to show you the commercial I am talking about, shall I record it on Tivo and then go to your house? Why can't you understand that I posted the links so that you could see it!? So that I can point out what I believe makes a good commercial.
Exactly, you can SHOW ME the commercial, but you aren't marketing it to me. TV commercials are MEANT to be seen in their medium. Companies pull ads because of placement in a show, like at the end of a long string of commercials or right before the show starts again. There is a method to the madness!
I apologize I didn't go to the school of horrible marketing, but I think the consumer knows a bit more about what they like they some guy in an office. And I will tell you that while the Universe commercials were playing on TV they were the best commercials out there, I didn't mind watching them over and over again because they are amazing commercials.
That guy in the office, sampled thousands of people and went over weeks of research asking people in many many different ways what they liked and monitored effectiveness. Besides you didn't even read what I said! They had to pay for a minute of airtime, hire special effects to make it and song usage and they advertised a product they did not have. READ!
On the other hand do I want to see some naked guy with a thumb for a penis? Hell no.
Again, did you read what I asked you before?
Do you live in the region it was playing? Do you remember it? Did you see it on TV?
To make a good commercial it must be entertaing, show or make reference to your product and be something you don't mind watching in between your show. Take the superbowl for instance, those are the most expensive commercials in the world, and what do they do? They make you laugh, they make you want to watch them, they are memorable. As opposed to watching something so annoying, and so repetitive that you vow to not buy the product simply because the ad annoys you.
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Research_25/A_downside_to_funny_Super_Bowl_ads.asp
read that page and see how researchers are suggesting that super bowl ads might not be worth it.
there is plenty of material going around to show that comedy is sometimes unmemorable. I mean just now I bet you can't tell me three super bowl commercials and what they were about and who their sponsor was. Sure you can look it up, but it isn't memorable.
Your problem is that you think you know but you do not know
|
successes of these commercials:
Quick, cheap, interesting
classy, unobtrusive, very subtle
Employs "information gap" "mere exposure" proven tested studies by thousands of research studies. These things are like law in psychology.
But whatever you know more than me because what you feel is relevant for the entire population.
Even though you have no facts, no studies, no credibility. You are just going by your own opinion, which for what I can tell you right now, is at least not accepted by even 10% of the people you think you represent.
Whereas I am trained, I am providing links and scientific research and evidence, case studies and meta-analyses, my own personal experience and judgments based on 50+ years of backlog research studies.
And you insulted me whereas despite you not reading, I've been very understanding, and have given an honest effort to inform you.
This part was obviously just for elaboration, there are arguments within your text as well, but let me just clarify you on something. The reason you are not answering my questions as to "did you see the penis commercial on tv" "do you live in said region", and the reason you are not answering to many of my points is because you have no answer for them.
