Now the rumors, buzz, and blog chat may be coming to an end as many sources are now reporting that AT&T's hold on Apple's iPhone will end early in 2011. This is good news for many Verizon customers, who number more than 92 million strong.
That's because with all the marbles on the line, the Super Bowl's big winners were those who didn't play it safe. In fact, the biggest risk-takers were rewarded (or will be rewarded) with the best returns.
First, there was Saints' coach Sean Payton who opted to start off the second half with a surprise onside kick. Of course, it turned out to be successful, and changed the tone and vibe of the game. Even had it not worked, however, Payton sent a message to the Colts that he was not going to simply go the tried-and-true by the book route. It was a big risk that paid off big-time.
Is it a great return on investment to give away all that food on Denny's "Super Tuesday?" Maybe/maybe not, but that's what brand investment is all about.
At a time when conventional wisdom tells us that if we want to win in business, we need play it safe, don't make mistakes, and avoid risks, it might be wise to revisit that thinking.
We saw The Saints win their first NFL championship in their history, a franchise that was formed a week after the first Super Bowl was played. The Saints went 10 years before posting a .500 season, and saw 20 years pass before realizing a winning season.
We saw a victory that vindicated the loyalty of their long-suffering fans, and another layer of healing balm settle upon on a great city, that lest we forget, has endured insufferable trials.
We also saw another crop of SuperBowl ads, each 30-second avail costing between $2.5 and $3 million, lower than NBC's 2009 rates of $3 million per, when adjusted for inflation.
And then there was this :60 ad, which stood in stark contrast to the others. No famous actors, no rap stars, no Hollywood director, no Avatar-rivaling computer-generated graphics.
Google's first foray into Super Bowl advertising, was most-likely the least-expensive and conceptually simplest and least expensive of the lot. To my eye, it was also the most engaging, did the best job of actually demonstrating the product, and was most worthy of an on-line after-the-game replay.
It also screamed, in a subtle and seductive manner - "new media." If you've ever tried to explain what "search" is all about, Google nailed it in one minute.
Are major sports organizations missing the boat when it comes to promoting their elite athletes? By snubbing their "true teams" - collections of great players (like the Orlando Magic or Detroit Red Wings who lack marketable stars) who somehow come together to vie for and win championships - are they sending out the wrong message to fans?
The NBA was dying for that Kobe vs. LeBron match-up, but the Orlando Magic had different ideas. By dispatching James' one-man team, the Magic has reached the NBA Finals, while breaking the hearts of the TV networks and the NBA corporate moguls.
But wait a minute! Who won the Stanley Cup last year between these same two teams? And which one has now won four Stanley Cups in the last eleven years? And the Red Wings don't have any players worth isolating on Star Cams?
Sometimes in order to truly capitalize on bigger than life personalities, sports leagues lose some perspective along the way, and the truly tuned-in fans know the difference.
How do you market a great brand in 2008? You could use statistics or positioning statements. But if you want to create true resonance, you tell a story.
Ask marketers like Seth Godin or Tom Asacker. They'll tell you that a great story will trump data every time.
The Buffalo Bills are doing that right now with their "My Bills. My story." campaign that lives on their website, and also doubles as a media campaign. Our old friend, Vh1 Executive VP & General Manager Tom Calderone, is the focus of one of these stories. They sell season tickets and the Bills experience better than action shots of the team or special rebates.
Perhaps I'll get the collective "Duh" when this blog is posted, but the aftermath of all the expensive Super Bowl TV spots is the difference in web traffic that advertisers garnered. The big Internet winners were Hyundai, Paramount, and GoDaddy.com.
And how did they do it? It was driven primarily by adding a URL to these spots in order to stimulate web visitation.
The GoDaddy.com spot (the one that teased Danica Patrick) is at the top of the list. It was not well-rated in the popularity polls (#48 out of 55), but web traffic on their site was up more than 500%.
True ROI for advertising and marketing must now include multi-platform efforts. And this is another area where radio can benefit, too. When we actually get some marketing dollars, think about billboard and TV spots that aren't simply inert messages that hope to make an impression or stimulate tune-in. Adding a URL - perhaps even a microsite that is connected to the main site - can motivate everything from voting to finding out more about the station. And if the right content is on the site, it can actually generate buzz.
We are seeing great indicators of how great web content can have a life of its own. The Obama "Yes We Can" video that was making the rounds last week is a case in point (I received it more than five times). On YouTube alone, I counted more than 7 million views for a video that didn't cost the candidate a cent.
While the Obama video is very viral, radio can generate its own buzz by repurposing content, and getting it out to its databases. A case in point was an email I received from NPR called "Rebuilding The Beatles." It contained a link to a Morning Edition story about the Fab Four that I hadn't heard in "real time." By giving me the chance to hear it for the first time online, they created a great integrated marketing effort that marries their programming with their website, powered by their listener database. Total cost? $0.
Amidst all the hype about the ads during the Super Bowl (which seem to be getting less spectacular every year), Chrysler has done a quiet marketing relaunch that is worthy of attention. No longer a member of the Big 3, as their overall share and impact diminishes, it is interesting to watch how the company intends to reinvent itself up against the massive Toyota, General Motors, and other competitors.
While Chrysler didn't buy the big ticket Super Bowl spots, they instead cherry-picked 55 key markets for their campaign. While Doritos may get all the attention for their consumer-generated ads, Chrylser appears to be using customers (or at least actors playing customers) to suggest that they're listening to real people, which is helping them improve their cars and feature packages.
Declaring "It's A New Day," a spot shows an animated little boy who designs the perfect car company. In others, actors "suggest" improvements, followed-up by Chrylser reinforcing they've listened to consumers, and are now offering new features at regular prices (bigger engines, free GPS, etc.).
A good idea, perhaps, especially up against all their competition, but where's the authenticity? Where are the real consumers? While they've created a website - www.chryslerlistens.com - there's no identified place for people to write comments and suggestions. And while there's a blog of sorts, it tends to be self-serving messages from Chrysler execs. A few comments are coming in - and they're not all complimentary - but if Chrysler is truly serious about integrating consumer ideas into their product and marketing strategies, they'll need to be more genuine in their efforts.
This is another case where "walking the walk" is critical in making "We listen to you" campaigns successful, rather than be the source of consumer derision and skepticism. If Chrysler is truly serious about reinventing itself, truly listening to consumers can be both scary and rewarding.
