As a result, this will be a short entry; I need to complete a business plan revision today.

So, on to the Superbowl. I predicted a Bears win in a sloppy game. Well, we got the sloppy game. Did the opening kickoff return remind anyone else of the Debacle in the Desert? Sure did for me…I knew the Bears were doomed then. I turned off the TV and watched the rest of the game later while muted and in fast forward. This is the best way to watch bad games, it cuts the time commitment down to about 40 minutes.



$85,000 per second for advertising was wasted apparently. A study performed on the physiological impacts of the Superbowl ads showed they weren’t effective by and large. Except at activating the amygdala, the “fight or flight” center of the brain. My favorite result was from Honda, it had less impact than showing a blank screen!

Rhetorical question: If you’re going to pony up $2.5M for a 30 second ad, wouldn’t you spend a few thousand dollars to test that it would be effective before airing it to a billion people to discover it makes them want to leave the room or throw a beer bottle through the TV? Nah, that would make too much sense.

Martin Hardee makes an interesting set of observations in his latest entry on the Dorito’s ad (one of the few to test positive by the way…) Makes you realize just how badly Viacom fumbled the ball with the YouTube situation.



Watch all the Superbowl advertisements here.


If you liked this entry, Digg It!
Tune: Don’t You Lie To Me by Chuck Berry
Technorati Tags: Superbowl | Advertising | Failure | Mike Harding Blog