$3 Million Super Bowl Ads Becoming Overrated

This year’s Super Bowl ads seemed to disappoint viewers (although that seems to happen every year). After ads being banned and soaring costs (about $3 million for a 30-second spot), we still saw the same tired commercials (wow, look, Go Daddy girl is ripping her shirt off again while Danica Patrick gawks at her for the umpteenth time) and the familiar brands Coke, Budweiser, et al. With the increasing popularity of social media and viral marketing, I am hoping major brands will start moving away from the exorbitant costs and scrutiny that comes with Super Bowl advertising and take their branding and marketing campaigns online. Not to mention they will get better results for $3 million investment.

Pepsi has already made the shift. A few months ago they announced that, for the first time in 20 somthing years, they were not going to advertise during the Super Bowl, electing instead to focus on social media marketing. I think it’s a smart move since $3 million is going to go much farther online than in a one-time 30 second ad, especially when most of us have DVRs and streaming video. With social media marketing, Pepsi can tweak its messaging to cater to different markets and demographics instead of trying to come up with a single ad that can appeal to the masses.

Remember, these are my thoughts and if you are willing to spend $3 million in to Super Bowl Ads feel free to do it. But if it was me, I would spend my money on social media and viral marketing.

Comments are welcome.