5.1. Message Execution I: Comparative Ads Flashcards
comparative advertising
directly or indirectly naming competitors in an ad comparing one or more specific attributes
history comp ad
Kinds of comparative approaches
- challenge other brand through outing superiority of the target brand (Pepsi vs coke, BK vs Mcs, Jaguar vs BMW)
-
demonstrate superiority of target brand over another brand by comparing specific features
(BK Whopper vs MCs Big Mac, Mac vs PC, Apple vs android, Miller light vs bud light, dunkin vs starbucks, soups
company compares itself to leading brand =>
- helps get new brands into evoked set of consumer
- often used by brand with small market share
- can locate brand in same category space as leading brand
- requires convincing execution of the comparison
for comp ad to work (compare with leading brand),…
challenging brand must be equal or superior or at least some performance dimension important to buyers
Comparative advertising: leaders
- little benefit for leading brands
=> already closely associated with the product category
=> identifying competitors in ad provides them with free advertising - when leading brands use comp adv., they ought to compare themselves to something not a member of the product category
Things to consider in comp adv
- can induce negative attitude/ image toward the target brand
- can increase awareness or positive attitude for the brand mentioned in the ad, not for the target brand
- can be at high risk of being involved in legal issues
comp adv - discussion points - explicit vs implicit examples
Explicit (mac vs pc)
Implicit (coke vs pepsi)
comp adv - discussion points - comparing specific feature vs simply showing preference
comparing specific features (miller vs bud)
simply showing preference (heineken vs bavaria)
comp adv - discussion points - naming brand vs not mentioning it
everyone can guess
showing the superiority of the target brand vs attacking other brand
