« Fiat makes green pitch via crash-test panda | Main | Murro and Barrett, always on the same page »
Pringles banner ad worth a few dozen clicksI've long been of the opinion that creating banner ads should be punishable by stoning. But this Pringles ad from Bridge Worldwide in Cincinnati doesn't suck. If nothing else, I appreciate that it isn't flashing horrible circus colors and promising me a free Xbox or a spyware-laden "virus scan." It's also kind of neat that clicking on it repeatedly reveals a little story within the ad, an innovation that earned it a gold Cyber Lion at Cannes last week. According to its Cannes entry materials, the ad "shows a young, online audience how fun, eccentric—and even downright weird—life with Pringles can be." The best part? It doesn't even take you to the Pringles Web site. That's a quality I can appreciate in a banner ad. It does expose, however, that Pringles needs to make a wider can already. —Posted by David Kiefaber |
|
June 29, 2009 in Bridge Worldwide, Food and drink, Kiefaber, Pringles | Permalink |
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
A very cool concept! As someone who deals with banner ads daily, this is a great example of thinking outside the box.
Posted by: Christopher Scott | Jun 29, 2009 9:41:11 AM
I couldn't resist this; I just kept clicking. I don't think I'll be rushing out to by any Pringles, but a cool concept nonetheless.
Posted by: lindsey | Jun 29, 2009 10:12:38 AM
Once you pop...
Posted by: Pringle's Gauntlet | Jun 29, 2009 10:24:25 AM
David, great pick-up on this for a story.
I do have a bone to pick with your comment that "I've long been of the opinion that creating banner ads should be punishable by stoning."
I think many more TV ads (SAVE BY ZERO!!!) are far more annoying then 99.9999% of banner ads. But that's just me. I also acknowledge that banner ads make news, entertainment and information sites free for me to use an I appreciate that. Or did you just happen to forget what industry you're in? Also, the ads your referencing don't stand up to best practices for most advertisers and agencies. Bummer you feel that way.
BTW...when's the last time an advertisers Tweet or Facebook page provided you with free content?
Posted by: Captain Spaulding | Jun 29, 2009 11:01:45 AM
Lindsey said it PERFECT!
Posted by: Luther | Jun 29, 2009 1:09:13 PM
brilliant banner ad. love it.
Posted by: vinny warren | Jun 29, 2009 2:32:07 PM
She looks like Allison Hannigan in mid O-face.
Posted by: Don't Stop | Jun 29, 2009 3:29:22 PM
I'm backing David on banner ads. They're worse than bad most of the time, especially now that they've stopped being simple ads and have become the flash based nightmares they are today.
"Yeah but tv ads are worse" isn't really a reasonable defense.
"Free Content" is only valuable if it's content worth having paid for.
Posted by: Mike Wilson | Jun 29, 2009 3:39:46 PM
Banners don't kill people, click through rates kill people.
Posted by: National Banner Association | Jun 30, 2009 12:28:28 AM
Awesome banner if a user would have actually clicked on it the initial time in belief that it would not take them to a site.
Posted by: Ted Kady | Jun 30, 2009 8:28:13 AM
David thinks banner ads are intrinsically evil; Gauntlet thinks they serve a greater good. But they both agree that this Pringle's example is not only a good banner, but a good ad.
Maybe the problem here isn't that banner ads suck, per se, but that the quality of the ideas going into them sucks.
Good work usually gets noticed, no matter what the medium, and banners are no exception. So why not make good ones?
Posted by: Fabadoo | Jun 30, 2009 10:45:20 AM
Banners are like Fabadoo. Useless and boring
Posted by: Fabadont | Jun 30, 2009 2:46:57 PM
This looks like something VML (Kansas City) would do. Creative, but doen't sell me anything. They are pretty famous for that trick. In the end does it make me want to buy Pringles?
Posted by: Micheal Post | Jun 30, 2009 2:57:30 PM
Total rip off of the Don't push the red button flash game.
Not original at all. Willing to bet it performed horribly in the actual campaign. CTA is tiny, users absolutely abhor clicking. That's the problem with these awards, they don't factor in actual effectiveness.
Posted by: Ken | Jun 30, 2009 3:14:23 PM
Dear Ken and all the other—"performance is king" proponents,
Branding is an almost entirely intangible and largely immeasurable thing. What online/direct advertisers fail to realize is that getting someone's attention is only half the battle; the rest is in choosing Target over Walmart. Online advertising suffers because the numbers are there for people to stew over and over-analyze.
Sincerely,
Jerky McJerkerson
Posted by: Jerky McJerkerson | Jul 1, 2009 5:22:04 AM
Although it didn't make me want to click it, in fact I'd likely have missed the ad all together if placed normally, once i did click it, It was hard to stop.
There is where it's success lays. I'm not hungry, and don't even like pringles, but I find it hard to shake the memory of the ad OR the brand.
I question how effective it was though, as like I said: I would have never clicked the ad if there wasn't a blog post about it.
Posted by: Antoine Butler | Jul 1, 2009 12:39:10 PM
KILLER.
Posted by: Rich Sullivan | Jul 1, 2009 6:44:47 PM
We are currently creating banner ads for one our clients and this is really, really, interesting work. So much better than that dancing cartoon lady because she has low mortgage payments.
Posted by: Grey NY Interns | Jul 6, 2009 9:55:27 AM
When banner ads first came out, an animated GIF was about as annoying as they could be. Now, however we have Flash all over the web, and Macromedia/Adobe in their infinite wisdom decided to leave it up to the flash programmer whether or not to put audio controls in the flash app. After a couple of times of having to hunt through 12 firefox tabs for which page had an annoying ad in which a voice could be heard saying "HELLOOOOO" and simulated tapping on my screen, I had to install FlashBlock. Why couldn't you guys just have been cool and put in a right-click "Sound Off" option?
Posted by: George | Jul 10, 2009 5:15:42 PM
Congratulations to Bridge Worldwide for winning the award and showing everyone that banners can be fun.
Posted by: Rob Bunting | Jul 13, 2009 8:49:11 AM
I have to agree this banner ad is cute and creative. However from a marketing standpoint it seems that it will be a disappointment in terms of ROI. It's important to remember that successful marketing = increased sales for the advertiser.
This ad leaves out a critical element of a successful online advertising campaign - the ability to track response.
Since there's no landing page to track click-throughs, the advertiser has no idea how many visitors were engaged by the ad. With no metrics available, the effectiveness of the ad can not be determined.
Posted by: David | Jul 22, 2009 11:55:14 AM
i'm sorry but i just dont get how some here totally don't get the concept of branding. Do the coca cola ads make you wanna go out and buy a drink right away? No they don't, yet coka cola is worlds most valuable brand. Not all ads are created to generate instant sale, some are created to strengthen the brand image which long term means increased sales
Posted by: Natasha | Jul 28, 2009 11:08:32 PM
Branding and direct response/marketing methods can be used simultaneously, in the same ad. These two advertising methods are not mutually exclusive. Some of the most successful ads have done this. And as we have seen in the current economic environment, it's becoming more commonplace because advertisers can track interactions and results from ads.
Whether you have a pure branding campaign or a direct response/marketing campaign, there is still an ROI. It doesn't go away just because it's hard to track a pure branding campaign. Remember, ROI can be negative as well as positive.
Posted by: David M | Jul 30, 2009 10:16:47 AM
It's a cool advertisement. I hope they are distributing this in many places. It's too good to stick to only a few when there are so many advertising networks that could support banner and image advertising (eg Adwido).
Posted by: mlgreen8753 | Aug 8, 2009 5:14:40 PM
Good Check me out also
Posted by: Abh | Oct 22, 2009 2:02:25 PM
