There’s no question that Super Bowl ads are often very clever, entertaining, engaging and sometimes even “powerful.” Many of these spots are shared or viewed millions of times after game day. But are they effective?
Meaning: do they generate sales or other value for the brands and companies that pay so much to have them produced and aired? The assumption is yes — demand continues. But the empirical evidence suggests the opposite.
A 30-second ad at this year’s Super Bowl will cost advertisers $4.5 million. Well over 100 million people in the US will see the game, while hundreds of millions around the world will likely see some or much of it (the billion people figure is a myth).
Massive Exposure, Minimal Impact?
This kind of massive, concentrated exposure is unavailable anywhere else in the world of media. Advertisers now extend the value and reach of their ads by pre-releasing them and making them available long after the game. The good or funny ones will be shared and seen many millions of times.
But there appears to be a profound disconnect between viewer enjoyment of the ads on game day and later buying behavior in the real world. A new survey conducted by Genesis Media (n=10,000 US adults) found that nearly 90 percent of respondents said that they were unlikely to buy something tied to a Super Bowl ad; and roughly 75 percent of respondents said they couldn’t remember ads from last year.
Genesis says that one reason Super Bowl ads may be ineffective is because roughly 33 percent of the audience is expected to be on mobile devices during the game. (Super Bowl advertisers: if you haven’t set up your mobile search campaigns yet, do it now.)
Earlier studies are consistent with these findings. Last year, based on interviews with more than 1,000 US consumers both before and several weeks after the Super Bowl, ad research firm Communicus found that up to 80 percent of ads don’t impact purchases or purchase intent in any way. Brand metrics like “favorability” or “recall” based on the ads don’t necessarily translate into subsequent purchase behavior.
Most Shares but No Sales
Among the top 10 most shared Super Bowl ads of all time there’s limited evidence of success. Here are the brands/companies behind the ads:
Volkswagen Passat (Volkswagen Group)
Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch InBev)
Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch InBev)
Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch InBev)
Dodge Ram (Fiat-Chysler)
Movie: Fast & Furious 6 (Universal)
Chevrolet (General Motors)
Volkswagen (Volkswagen Group)
Movie: Fast Five (Universal)
Movie: Star Trek Into Darkness (Paramount)
Overall Volkswagen had a good year in 2014. However sales of the car specifically shown (Passat) in the most shared Super Bowl ad of all time — it’s a terrific ad — were off nearly 30 percent in January 2014 vs. the previous year. They were off 7 percent in February, 13 percent in May, 10 percent in August and off 21 percent in November 2014. Indeed, every month, sales of VW’s Passat were down vs. 2013.
Perhaps the Super Bowl ad raised Passat sales from January to February. If so the impact was modest — if it was there. VW is not doing a Super Bowl ad this year.
The company behind the all-time second, third and fourth most shared ads, Budweiser, is facing a long-term sales decline. From a peak of 30 million barrels shipped in 2003, Bud shipped 16 million barrels in 2013. Despite being the third most consumed beer in the US more people now drink craft beer than Budweiser.
One might argue that the beloved Super Bowl ads and other marketing that Budweiser does keeps the brand top of mind for beer drinkers (and maybe mitigated the pace of decline). But it’s a weak beer and a weak product that probably ultimately doesn’t have a future. Super Bowl advertising doesn’t seem to have had much if any impact on perception of the brand or sales.
People may feel good after seeing “Puppy Love,” one of its several 2014 Budweiser Super Bowl ads, but the company doesn’t have much to show for it. People aren’t buying more Bud as a result.
This is not to say that Super Bowl advertising never works.
Ads May “Work” in Specific, Limited Circumstances
The ads for movies on the list above probably built awareness and additional momentum that helped at the box office. There’s no way to determine for sure whether or how much of a lift there was. Last year’s Alex and Ani Super Bowl ads were effective (the company’s third year) because many people didn’t know the specialty retailer and they helped generate awareness and search queries for the company.
Sleazy though they were, GoDaddy’s several years of Super Bowl advertising helped establish massive awareness for the company’s brand. In fact it’s very hard for the public to name another domain registrar. And last year Super Bowl ads helped to start changing the company’s image.
One could probably find other examples, where Super Bowl ads helped brands in one way or another. However positive sales impact is very difficult to find. I’m not arguing that all Super Bowl ads are worthless — I love seeing them too — I’m arguing that the widely held industry assumptions about the “halo effect” or other benefits of Super Bowl ads are dubious in most cases, if not entirely false.
Mobile marketing platform Fiksu points out that for the $4.5 million spent on a single 30-second spot you could generate roughly 576 million mobile impressions and much greater brand engagement.
Commentaires