House Ads: Not In Print Or Online, But Literally ON Your House
When I first saw a press release from mobile advertising company Adzookie.com stating the company would pay the mortgage of any house willing to have the brand's name and logo painted on it in highly visible and loud colors, two things came to mind.
First, I thought it was an April Fool's joke five days late. I also thought I was witnessing an advertising apocalypse.
Not to mention -- if something sounds too good to be true, usually it is.
But apparently Adzookie was making a legitimate offer. Thousands of applications have been submitted to date: businesses, restaurants and even a church applied to become an immobile billboard for a mobile company.
Homeowners must own their home, so no renters or leasers can apply. Pretty much everything but the rooftop, windows and awnings will be painted -- a job that should take three to five days to complete.
Homeowners must agree to keep their home painted for at least three months, with the longest stretch being one year.
What about the neighbors? Couldn't they complain to their town or city officials about their neighbor's loud, advertising-sponsored home colors? Each city is undoubtedly different, but I'm sure that this won't pass everywhere. I also can't imagine Adzookie paying the mortgages of homeowners living in small towns or cul-de-sacs, with little to no traffic.
And what if you're trying to sell your house and your next-door neighbor gets an extreme makeover, NASCAR-edition? Good luck with that.
Adzookie's Facebook page is bogged down with pictures of homes and pitches from homeowners, describing their location and approximate amount of car traffic that will potentially pass on a daily basis.
And then I came across a CNNMoney article informing homeowners not to hold their breath for this campaign: "The home billboard scheme could raise the company's profile -- but don't expect too many homes to score the subsidized deal. Mendoza's budget for the entire program is $100,000, and he expects to spend about $8,000 per house on the painting alone."
With math like that, the advertising apocalypse isn't as close as I suspected. Or is it?