Brand: CarMax
Execution: TV
Target: Used car buyers
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
A Clint Eastwood-voiced cowboy rides into a corral in a dusty Western town, saying “I need another horse,” to the man who greets him. The horse salesman says, “You ever been to a HorseMax?” “Nope,” says the cowboy. “Come on, I’ll show you around.” Then the salesman explains the HorseMax policy, “see, at HorseMax we’ll buy your horse whether you buy one of ours or not,” he says as they pass a ringing cash register. “… even if she ain’t in good shape,” he adds as the men see a horse with a brace of arrows planted in it (the ASPCA disclaimer about the horses not having been harmed flashes at the bottom of the screen at this point). “See that filly there?” the salesman asks, “We’d never sell you that horse.” The horse the salesman is pointing to is obviously a horse costume with two people inside. “You know why?” he asks and as we see the man at the head take off the horse mask and shake his head, he answers the question himself, “It ain’t right on the inside.” “We even got a money back guarantee,” the salesman concludes. At this moment the spot shifts scenes seamlessly to the modern day as two similar men walk conspicuously in front of a CarMax. “Oh,” the man who is the customer says, “It’s amazing no one’s thought of this before.” The spot cuts to a car max logo with the tagline, “The way buying should be.” [emphasis from spot copy].

What Works:
We like this spot because it carefully lays out the brand positioning (‘a better buying experience’) while maintaining visual and story interest. The western set adds entertainment and intrigue to the spot but doesn’t distract from the message. Indeed, the obvious perils of trading in a used horse underlines the unsatisfactory state of the used car buying experience in the prospective buyer’s mind. This is a good example of a spot which is able to work in a number of relevant copy points without feeling too slow or looking like too much of a sale pitch.

What Doesn’t:
CarMax doesn’t actually make its appearance to the end of this spot, which could make brand recognition harder although we believe most consumers will think of CarMax when the HorseMax name is first spoken. The pacing of this commercial is good, but not exceptionally brisk.

Branding Bottom Line:
CarMax would really have something if they could line-extend to SpouseMax, ChildMax and In-Law-Max.

Brand: Doritos (Frito-Lay/PepsiCo)
Execution: TV (Live the Flavor, Checkout Girl) Super Bowl
Target: Young Snackers
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
The winner and runner-up  of a submit-your-own-ad contest by Doritos, both of which aired on the Super Bowl.  The first spot, “Live The Flavor” by Dale Backus and Wes Phillips has a driving, Doritos-munching guy starstruck by a woman who is also eating a big bag of Doritos.  With an Aria from ‘La Traviata’ playing in the background, the man and woman make eye contact, causing the man to wreck his car and the woman to fall on her face.  The words “Spicy, Cheesy, Crunchy, Bold and Smooth” are interjected to descibe the both the Doritos and the action.

The second spot, “Checkout Girl” by Kristen Dehnert has a man purchasing groceries at a supermarket. As she scans a bag of Doritos she says, “I like these – nacho cheese – old school.”  After scanning the next bag she says, “Fiery Habanero – YEAH – those are HOT!” becoming much more animated.  Then “Oh – Salsa Verrrrrde,” and she purs at the guy who purs back.  “Blazin’ Buffalo and Ranch?  Giddy-up!” Then we see a bag of Doritos exploding against a black background and the www.snackstrong.com URL.  The spot ends with the woman, hair disheveled rising up to her intercom mike and saying, “I’m going to need a cleanup on register 6.

What Works:
Bob Garfield’s negative take on these spots aside, these spots are remarkable for both strategy and execution.  Both are on-strategy for the Doritos brand whose brand character is bold and unconventional and whose brand strategy is to be an enabler of social connections.  Both are also extremely well produced, with good pacing, engaging storylines and good visuals.

What is extraordinary about these spots is that they were both produced by amateurs rather than advertising agencies.  While marketers can argue whether these spots were the most effective of the Super Bowl, nobody will argue that they certainly were not the worst spots of the Super Bowl (this advertising blog would put them in the top 10) – and that in itself is remarkable.  This Super Bowl represents a distinct step forward for consumer-generated media where the best consumer efforts are very hard to distinguish from professional efforts.

Consumer-generated media is a tricky proposition and we would not advise brands to begin handing the keys to the media plan over to consumer wily-nily.  And we also can see that the creeping professionalism of the consumer-generated spots can make these more like visual resumes for aspiring filmmakers than spontaneous engagement from he brand faithful.  But they have several advantages over traditional agency advertising.  They are less expensive to produce, they follow creative lines that agencies would often not venture down and they have ancillary benefits like PR exposure and a sweepstakes effect.

What Doesn’t:
Viewed purely as professional advertising, both of these spots would be good but not great.  It seems possible that people outside the advertising community could create effective ads that are vastly different from traditional advertising – the same way a blog is different in tone and substance from a print news column.  The problem here could be in the judging process.  Did Doritos allow itself to be open to truly revolutionary work?  As we only saw the finalists for this competition we cannot say.  Certainly most brands want to save themselves from a Chevy Tahoe fiasco, but more openness might be better in spite of the risk to the brand.  Doritos might have played it a bit too safe.

Branding Bottom Line:
A zesty effort from Doritos has us craving more.

Brand: Chase Freedom (JPMorgan Chase)
Execution: TV
Target: Reward card holders (both points and cash back)
Rating: ***
Reviewer: Bob Bader

Description:  The McGarry Bowen spot announces a new credit card, Chase Freedom, that provides the option of choosing reward points or cash back.    The execution opens with a reveal of the new Chase Freedom credit card.  The card rotates into a horizontal plane to serve as the flat-earthly platform for a vacationing couple, who traverse the card while a tropical beach scene sprouts upon them.  The voiceover announces the ability to use the card to earn points (hence the vacation setting) or get cash back – and the flexibility to switch between the two.  To illustrate this, the beach scene dissolves through the credit card and is transformed into a flow of dollars, and then back again into the tropics (an effect reminiscent of the old paper-to-dollar magic trick ).

What Works:
The Chase Freedom concept – a best-of-both-worlds solution – is communicated clearly in this spot with an introductory, breakthrough tone – and a touch of hyperbole.  Chase has unshackled consumers from a world of reward card tradeoffs, freeing them to pursue their dreams in ways undreamt of before.  This positioning aligns well with the Chase brand tagline, “Your Choice, Your Chase.”

Next, the spot adroitly employs the Fatboy Slim “I’m Free” remix for content reinforcement.  The timelessness of the base tune is significant.  Were 80’s products peddled to the melodic strains of Tommy Dorsey?  Interestingly, the Jagger audio isn’t heard until about a third of the way into the execution, a delay that amplifies its impact, helping to turn functional features into existential empowerment.

Finally, the tropics-to-dollars metamorphosis is confusing.  However, in the post-Tivo age, ambiguity in the eye of the beholder may be the price of entry for repeated viewership.  Today, the archetypal P&G product demo may only create detachment from peripatetic viewers.

What Doesn’t Work:
Chase Freedom mimics successful products from Capital One (No Hassles Rewards) and Citibank (PremierPass), so there is no news here.  The freedom message is being played out in different ways from the recently defunct Citi “Roman and Victor” spots to the “Stranded in the Antarctic” spots for CapitalOne Rewards.

Chase Freedom represents a strategic foray into the land of sub-branded products, vs. the current Chase branded products.  Managing one or more sub-brands can be deceptively difficult.  Will dollars committed to Chase Freedom help differentiate the parent Chase brand equity, building brand share over time?  Or will it prove equity dilutive, with a sub-branded product focus leading to fragmented media spending and messaging?

The current inquiries in the U.S. Congress on credit card industry practices including hidden credit card fees also creates some risk for the Chase Freedom card.  Unless the card is truly ‘free’ of huge late fees, interest-rate jackups and the other mean, consumer-unfriendly tricks that so pervade this industry, the positioning of this card will seem ironic rather than progressive.

Branding Bottom Line:
Chase joins Capital One and Citi with an initiative the credit card industry should have provided ages ago – reward flexibility.

Brand: Orville Redenbacher Gourmet Popping Corn (ConAgra Foods)
Execution: TV, Website
Target: Morbid Movie Lovers
Rating: *
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
Orville Redenbacher, iconic American businessman and inventor of gourmet popping corn who died in 1995 has been resurrected by Omaha-based ConAgra Foods and Crispin, Porter & Bogusky in a new campaign for the popcorn brand which is owned by ConAgra.  In the first spot, Redenbacher marvels at how light MP3 players have become, then transitions into his product benefit (Orville Redenbacher’s popcorn pops up lighter and fluffier than ‘ordinary popcorn’). CGI graphics apparently render the movements of Redenbacher’s mouth as well as his post-mortem appearance in the commercial.

What Works:
If ConAgra (or more likely Crispin, Porter) was looking to draw some attention, then they will certainly get it with this jarring spot.  Anyone remembering Redenbacher from the commercials of the 70′s through early 90′s will have a strong opinion about this campaign.  We suspect that the recall of this spot will be extremely high.

Younger audiences may not be familiar with Redenbacher and might not understand the implication of his appearance.  The selling proposition of this spot is still relevant and might work if the central issue of Redenbacher’s appearance after his death is overlooked.

What Doesn’t:
This advertising blog witnessed a lively debate over the Gap/Audrey Hepburn spot (see our commentary here).  While the ad was well-executed, creative and cast an interesting light on Hepburn and Gap, many felt that it was morbid and inappropriate to resurrect Hepburn to peddle a product she never used in her life.

This appearance by Orville Redenbacher is ethically simpler, but much more distasteful in execution.  Redenbacher is resurrected to tout his life’s work, the product he loved with virtually the same words he used in the 70′s and 80′s.  Crispin, Porter and ConAgra, however, seem intent on pushing the viewer to acknowledge Redenbacher’s demise and resurrection by having him comment on MP3 players – an innovation that wasn’t around while he was.  This is what makes the spot feel so jarring and disconcerting.  CGI animation which makes it clear that Redenbacher’s lower jaw has been resynched to his new words like a marionette reinforces the chilling effect of this spot.

The problem with this spot is really that it is more provocation than sales pitch.  Crispin, Porter shoves our nose in the superhuman power of corporations to revive the dead for their own ends.  The crudeness of this effect makes it feel like subversive social commentary, striving for the exact effect it produces.

We doubt it will sell much popcorn.

Branding Bottom Line:
Redenbacher makes us think about death every time we eat popcorn.  Thanks, ConAgra.

Starting this week, our client-side advertising review staff has added a new voice.  Bob Bader is Group Director responsible for strategy development and marketing intelligence at Coca-Cola.  Bob wrote our review of Geico’s Caveman advertising this week and will soon be reviewing the Chase Freedom campaign.

Of course, Bob will not be writing about Coca-Cola or its competitors.  The rest of us won’t stop reviewing Coca-Cola or be any easier on Coke when we review their new campaigns.

Please join us in welcoming Bob to the ThirdWay Advertising Blog.

Brand: Bahamas (Bahamas Ministry of Tourism)

Description:
This campaign’s centerpiece is four spots, each of which document ‘Bahamaventions’ – interventions by the family and friends of the overstressed. A vacation to the Bahamas is the therapeutic answer to each of these situations. The four protagonists are Lyle – an overloud executive, Monte – a grim-faced family man, Malcolm – a skinny, pasty white guy and Maureen – a tightly wound wife.

What Works:
The best feature of this new campaign is that it focuses not on the “Where?” of travel or the “How?” but the “Why?” Instead of just seeing pristine beaches (which all look the same in advertising), Fallon carefully lays out the argument for going on vacation in the first place. A pasty complexion, high stress levels, the tendency to snap and a grim demeanor are all good signs of someone who needs a vacation. These spots work by methodically and comically laying out the ‘before’ using living caricatures of these symptoms. Then we get the solution – a Bahamas vacation. The end benefit is the relief of the symptoms we’ve seen at the front end of the spot. There is a social rationale behind this as well as Americans on average fail to use 4 vacation days a year (up from three) and increasingly identify ‘life balance’ as a key missing element in the modern workplace.

The second element in this campaign is the use of humor to engage the audience. This advertising blog is often critical of humorous campaigns because they distract from the brand or overwhelm the value proposition of the advertising. Here, though, the humor is nicely tuned to make the point that vacation is a necessity rather than a luxury.

Finally, the ‘hook’ to this commercial from the branding standpoint is the ‘Bahamavention.’ This is memorable and intuitive. It makes the campaign ownable. The ‘reason why’ points (700+ islands, multiple types of vacations) work better because it is not difficult to tie the advertising back to the brand because of this coined term.We cannot predict whether, as Fallon Creative Director Todd Riddle hopes, ‘Bahamavention’ will make it into the cultural vocabulary the way other Fallon campaigns have (most memorably the “I’m not a doctor but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night” line). But either way we believe this campaign will help the Bahamas and prove to be a landmark for other destinations looking to build brand identities.

What Doesn’t:
This campaign attempts to own a generic end benefit. It is a risky undertaking. We understand that stress and depression are rampant, but is the Bahamas the only cure? Or even the first cure we’ll remember? It all depends on the viral strength of the Bahamavention concept. If the concept doesn’t take – meaning we never hear Jay Leno or David Letterman crack a joke about a politician needing a Bahamavention – then Fallon should seek to narrow the brand positioning. They can instead say that Bahamavention may not be the only cure for stress but it is a unique cure, and then explain why. This campaign also depends upon the carefully managed execution of humorous creative which can sometimes create problems down the line.

Branding Bottom Line:
We think Michael Richards needs a Bahamavention.

Brand: Kraft
Execution: Print
Target: Women 25-54
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David

Description:
For the fourth year, Kraft is sponsoring a special holiday issue of People which is being sent to 1mm of People’s 2.3mm subscriber audience (the mid-life women).  The issue will feature ads for Philadelphia Cream Cheese, Chips Ahoy, Jell-O and cinnamon coffee which are embedded with ‘rub and sniff’ technology (the successor to ‘scratch ‘n sniff’) allowing consumers to smell the aroma of fresh cheesecake or coffee.  The new technology apparently prevents the premature release of the scent during the delivery process.  For more see Brian Steinberg’s article in the Wall Street Journal here.

What Works:
In his well-regarded book Brand Sense, Martin Lindstrom reminds us that most marketing activates only two of the five senses – sight and hearing.  Smart marketers with tangible products can use touch, taste and smell to add to the brand experience.  Mercedes, for instance, has patented its ‘new car smell’ which is added to each new Mercedes after production.  Scientists also know that smell is the sense most closely linked to memory, so it makes sense that brands ought to use smell as a marketing tool.  This is woefully difficult with packaged goods products whose scents must often remain hidden through the purchase experience only to emerge in the home.

Kraft has overcome this problem by turning back to a modern update of an old tactic – the scent-impregnated print ad.  In this modern incarnation, the scent is imbued on a portion of the page which can be rubbed to bring it forth.   The scent is also apparently more lifelike and less irritating than older versions – although we have not yet seen this execution in person.

We applaud Kraft for its forward-thinking approach to marketing.  Rub and sniff may be no more than a novelty at the moment, but it has the potential to enrich the advertising experience.  This advertising blog appreciates marketers who find innovative ideas in the past as well as in the future.

What Doesn’t:
It all comes down to execution, and technologies like ‘rub ‘n sniff’ are tricky.  If the odors of the food fail to remind us of home-baked alternatives, the energy spent behind this campaign will have been entirely waisted.

Branding Bottom Line:
Kraft has us nostalgic for hula-hoops and 8 track tapes.

Brand: Nissan Sentra (Nissan)
Execution: TV, Blog
Target: Young Drivers
Rating: *****
Reviewer: David

Description:
Nissan creates a new TV campaign for the Sentra featuring San Francisco native and photographer’s assistant Mark Horowitz living in his Sentra for a week. The seven spots are each entitled “A short film by Marc Horowitz”. Each is narrated by Mr. Horowitz and features his different experiences during the week. Horowitz adopted the following rules for his Sentra challenge:

I also set a bunch of rules for myself so the project is a little more challenging and has some boundaries. Here they are:

1. I must live 7 straight days out of my Sentra. I am free to come and go from the Sentra as I please.
2. I must not return to my apartment at any point during the 7 days.
3. I must assume my normal day-to-day responsibilities including work and all scheduled client meetings.
4. I must personally prepare at least 4 meals within the immediate vicinity of my Sentra.
5. I must go on at least one date. Hopefully more.
6. I must not let anyone else drive my car for the 7 days.
7. I must sleep in a different location each night. Once the location is chosen I must not move from it.
8. I must not set foot outside of my car for any reason from 12am to 5am.
9. I must host at least 2 social functions in my Sentra. One must be on or after Day 6.
10. I must maintain the highest standards of personal hygiene.

The spots bias towards comedy with Marc Horowitz showering in a sprinkler, cooking in a parking lot, going on a date with a girl who asks “Do you live in here?” and setting up an amateur autocross.

What Works:
We were most interested in this series of spots because it appears to have sprung from ethnographic research by Nissan. Adweek reports that the genesis of the campaign was a study of photos of Sentra owners which revealed that many of them were using the cars as rolling closets, carrying sports equipment, gym clothes and food among other things. That insight combined with the explosion of user-generated video on sites like YouTube and MySpace persuaded Jan Thompson, Nissan VP of Marketing to challenge Marc Horowitz to live in a new Sentra for a week and report back about it.

The spots are well executed and walk the tricky line between documentary filmmaking and advertising reasonably well. There is no pretense that the challenge and the spots are intended to do anything other than promote the Nissan Sentra, which helps. The spots are funny and engaging, which helps even more.

Most importantly, though, Nissan has reconceived the ‘product-as-hero’ form of advertising in a fresh new format. Instead of talking about the Sentra’s roominess or describing its bluetooth hands-free dialing, we see Marc Horowitz sleeping in the car and ordering pizza. This strikes us as a much more sensible way of showing the ‘permission to believe’ for the brand proposition than stating claims like “most interior volume in its class’ outright. The conventional approach always sounds to us like a comedian getting up in front of an audience and saying, “I’m really funny – ask my friends.”

The brand positioning here is around the user. Instead of trying to find someone to showcase a user demographic, Marc Horowitz personifies the psychographic profile of the user Nissan wants to embody for the Sentra. And it works. It is very difficult imagining Honda or Toyota following this route with the Civic or the Corolla.

What Doesn’t:
Six agencies including Omnicom Group’s TBWACD, OMD, Tequila, The Vidal Partnership, Edelman and The Designory were involved in this campaign. Given that and the slick production values, effects and professional editing of this spot make us uncomfortable with the tag, “A film by Marc Horowitz.” We do not know what part of the creative and editorial process Marc Horowitz assumed but unless he was the actual director (which is somewhat harder to imagine with the collection of high-priced talent that must have been surrounding him), then this campaign is not a series of independent films by Marc Horowitz. This damages the authenticity of what is otherwise an excellent effort.