While a woman-friendly Super Bowl may sound as farfetched as, well, Eli Manning getting a ring, Super Bowl XLII is shaping up to be one of the girliest TV events in some time--and maybe, for some time to come. At least, big-time marketers think so. Victoria's Secret, which has been missing on Game Day since 1999, is back this year, using the game to kick off its big Valentine's Day marketing effort. Procter & Gamble has bought a spot for Tide to Go, a stain remover. And Unilever will use the game to showcase a spot for Sunsilk, a hair-care product aimed at young women. On the surface, such buys are a bit of a no-brainer. The Super Bowl is always an enormous TV event. "Over 90 million people will watch the game in any given minute," says a Fox spokesperson. "But over 130 million will watch at least some of it. Historically, 45% are female." (During a typical season game in the NFL, only 37% of the viewers are women.) Still, marketers have tended to ignore those 40.5 million women, instead using Super Bowl spots to showcase beer, razor and automotive brands aimed at men. And to be sure, the relationship between women and football has always been an uneasy one: Just this year, security at Giants Stadium, for example, has decided to address the Concourse D phenomenon (where Jets fans scream, spit and throw things at women who refuse to show their breasts as they walk by.) And for years--in what turns out to be as big an urban legend as alligators in the New York City sewer systems--people have believed that the Super Bowl was linked to domestic violence. (That myth may have been sparked by NBC's decision to run a PSA for domestic violence awareness during the game back in 1993.) Experts say there are two reasons behind the switch. The first, says Rick Gentile, director of the Seton Hall University Sports Poll, is the writer's strike. "The Super Bowl is the most-watched show, and almost always the most-watched show by women," he says. "And with the writer's strike, there is nothing else out there. Nobody's even sure if the Academy Awards are going to happen." And even in a good year, the Super Bowl beats the stuffing out of the Oscars for reaching women. Last year's Super Bowl posted a 31.3 rating for women in the 18-to-49 demographic group, and last year's Academy Award hauled in just 17.2. So marketers "would need two ads in the Oscars to reach the same number of women as one Super Bowl ad," the Fox spokesperson says. Secondly, "while there may not be any more women watching the game than usual this year," says Todd Kirby, director of strategic research for Spark Communications, Starcom MediaVest Group's digital agency, there is a shift among the types of women watching the game. Baby Boomer women are a growth audience, he says, with women 55-plus up 25% since 2003. And of course, plenty of companies still target women as the MVPs in the Super Bowl party planning department. Wal-Mart, for instance, is re-running its lighthearted spots that feature women cooking, shopping and serving with all the intensity of gridiron greats. "The Super Bowl is a tremendous social event," says Kirby, even if it's not a great match-up. "In many ways, it doesn't even matter if the game is good. That's almost a bonus for advertisers." And initially, Gentile says, when it looked like the Dallas Cowboys might make it, "some people talked about how good that would be for ratings, to have the teams with the two cutest quarterbacks playing one another. But I think that's insulting--a woman isn't going to sit through a three-and-a-half-hour game because she thinks the quarterback is cute."
Marketers who think that an insert is just another part of their media mix--or a place to offer a coupon on a commodity product--may want to think twice about the importance of the medium, according to new research from Vertis Communications. In its latest Consumer Focus study, the Baltimore-based company found that people are less reliant upon television to spur their purchasing decisions and instead are looking toward inserts--as well as online promotions--to help make up their minds. According to the most recent survey of 3,000 American adults--the company's 10th annual--only 22% listed television as the main influence in making their purchasing decisions, down from 30% in 1998. Conversely, those who cited inserts rose a similar amount, from 19% ten years ago to 27% now. "A lot of [marketers] think of an insert as a buying tool," Vertis research director Scott Marden tells Marketing Daily. "But [consumers] are browsing them for styles, projects and activities." Not surprisingly, the Internet is also growing as a decision driver. Ten years ago, Vertis didn't even ask about the Internet in a consumer's decision-making process. And when Vertis first posed the medium eight years ago, only 11% cited the Internet as a decision driver. This year, 26% said it was a key driver, Marden says, adding: "The convenience and ease with which people can get information from the Internet means it will only continue to grow." The increased availability of information has also led to a more informed consumer when it comes to making purchases. According to the survey, only 17% of adults said they entered a store without having conducted prior research last year, compared to 31% in 2004 (when the question was first asked). Approximately 57% of consumers said they used advertising inserts as a research tool, 50% cited the Internet and 38% used catalogs, according to the survey. Over the 10 years of the Consumer Focus survey, Vertis has also tracked certain consumer behaviors. For instance, young adults are participating less in team sports than they were 10 years ago. They're also choosing to stay in, rather than go out. According to the survey, only 3% of young adults said they were more likely to go out to a movie than stay in. In 1998, 13% said they were likely to go to a movie. "That's not only important [information] for advertisers, but also for people who serve home needs," Marden says. "As people spend more time in their homes, all of those categories are going to take on more importance." The survey also noted that single women are becoming a more influential category versus 10 years ago. In 1998, only 69% of women between 18 and 24 were involved in home electronics purchases. By 2008, that number has grown to 91%, in part driven by the prevalence of personal electronics such as cell phones and computers. Over the past 10 years, the number of women 25-34 who were single or living with a significant other (as opposed to being married, divorced or widowed) increased 8% to 38%, according to the survey. And they are more educated: the percentage of women who had an undergraduate or graduate degree increased, from 28% to 41%, over those 10 years. Consumers are much more socially aware than they were 10 years ago, and are making decisions based on that awareness, Marden says. "Nowadays, people are much more environmentally focused or concerned about social fairness," he says. Consumers are also more open to change, whether it's in the form of political action or personal preference, he says. "Right now is the perfect time for new things, whether it's new products or new leadership. We're also seeing a younger attitude in the country, so we're talking about adopting messaging that's fresh and innovative and captures a new attitude."
Analysts at HCD Research want to know the exact moment in a Super Bowl advertisement that makes consumers talk about the brand. So, for the second straight year the Flemington, N.J. company has set up a two-part quantitative study to calculate human emotions and measure perceptions for ads that air during the game. The first part of the survey relies on a panel of ad executives--industry professionals like "Cheers" head writer Stewart Kreisman and professors, such as Arthur Kover, the former editor of the Journal of Advertising Research, and Chan Choi, chair of the marketing department at Rutgers University. Each will view the commercials during the game, ranking the top 20 advertisements. The winners will appear in a Web survey, and will be sent to nearly 3,000 participants. In this phase, researchers look for consumer perception. An automated response system will allow consumers to indicate their level of interest in half-second intervals as they watch each commercial. The system requires participating consumers to sit at a computer and move the cursor with a mouse to the left if disinterested, and to the right when interested. Results are averaged for each half second to determine the segments that generate the highest and lowest interest levels. The survey will base 50% of the results on findings from the automated response system, with the remainder split in half between consumer emotion and the likelihood of mentioning the ad the day after the Super Bowl. Results will be posted at mediacurves.com Monday morning. "Most commercials that air during the Super Bowl don't sell anything," says Glenn Kessler, HCD president. "They are done just for entertainment value. They get consumers to remember and mention the sponsors' names the day after, rather than move them to immediately buy something." Advertisers will spend an unprecedented $2.7 million to secure one 30-second spot during the Super Bowl that an estimated 142 million viewers will watch, according to the Kellogg School of Management. The school suggests that surveys indicate as many as 34% of men and 68% of women enjoy game-day ads more than the actual game itself. HCD isn't the only company looking to unlock the secrets behind Super Bowl ads. Firebrand, which claims to run the hottest spots from the coolest brands on TV, Web and mobile, plans to launch its own quantitative analysis to find the best ads. The day after the Super Bowl, consumers can go to Firebrand.com to view and vote for their favorite commercials that aired during the game. The top vote-getter will receive the first annual Firebrand Water Cooler trophy, a tongue-in-cheek award to recognize the most talked about commercials the day after the game. "To the ad industry, Monday after the game is the biggest day because that day everyone talks about the brands that ran commercials on Sunday," says Firebrand CMO Shari F. Leventhal. Voting for the Firebrand Water Cooler promotion opens Feb. 4, and closes Feb 11. Those who vote during the one-week campaign are entered into a drawing to win a cash prize. Firebrand will award one winner $5,000, and five second-place winners receive $1,000. Leading up to Super Bowl Sunday, Firebrand will launch its first national ad campaign, a series of TV spots on cable networks MTV, G4, Sci Fi and VH1, as well as online videos at TVGuide.com, YouTube, MySpace and Facebook, among others. The TV spots will begin on Monday with "Big Time Athletes." In December, Firebrand Creative Director Stacy Van Wickler began writing and working with the company's in-house creative team and outside production company PMCD to produce three 30-second spots and a two-minute viral video. The multimillion-dollar ad campaign depicts characters in football huddles, strategizing in the locker room in an effort to win the big game. The spots feature a parody of some of the most popular commercial icons, including Mr. Clean, Mr. Peanut and the Cavemen, among others.
While beer drinking has declined since 2003, the imported-beer market penetration has held steady, says Chicago-based Mintel. Between 2001 and 2006, imported beer's market share increased by 2.3%, which the consultancy says is the highest market share gain among all alcoholic beverages. Mintel says imported-beer sales in the U.S. will grow 5.9% through 2012. A full 26% of beer drinkers imbibe imported beer. The firm says import beers are benefiting from consumers' upgrading to brands like Stella Artois, and "consumer inclination to try new and small [import] brands." The firm says that Chinese brand Tsingtao, Czech brand Pilsner Urquell, German brands Hacker-Pschorr and Paulaner Biers, Italian brands Moretti and Peroni, Japanese brand Sapporo, Dutch brand Grolsch, and British brand Newcastle Brown Ale all have boosted U.S. sales and market share since 2002. Mintel says the up-grade trend is being driven--as in other CPG, appliance, and auto market segments--by the expansion of higher-income households in the U.S. The firm notes that from 1999-2006, the number of households pulling in over $75,000 increased by 50%, or nearly 12 million. The consultancy also says import-beer growth is being spurred by demographic diversity in the U.S., with Hispanic and Asian populations "considerably more likely than the average" to call for a beer from their country. Mintel says four Mexican brands--Corona, Carta Blanca, Modelo Especial, and Tecate--contributed 41 million cases, or 55% of the total growth of 76 million cases, during 2002-06. The challenges to import beers and domestic mass-market brands come from spirits and wine, and from the proliferation over the past decade of microbrewery "craft beers" like Magic Hat, Brooklyn Breweries, Sierra and others. Mintel quotes the Brewers Association's stats saying craft beer volume sales grew 12% in 2006. Mintel says craft beers attract both beer drinkers and wine and spirits drinkers because of the broad--sometimes wild--array of flavors and types, sophistication, full-bodied taste and higher-than-average alcohol content.
Nashville, Tenn.-based O'Charley's Restaurants, with 230 restaurants in 20 states, on Monday launched a TV campaign in 33 markets to tout its yeast rolls with an "It All Starts With the Rolls" theme. The push comprises three 30-second spots showing the salubrious effect a good O'Charley's roll has on one's weltanschauung in the face of life's daily slings and arrows. The Buntin Group, Nashville, handles. In one spot, a woman undergoes the horrific "dress-tangled-and-mangled-in-a-shopping-mall-escalator" humiliation so many of us fear. She covers herself up with her shopping bags as a basket of O'Charley's rolls magically appears before her. Mollified, she asks, "Is it cold in here, or is it just me?" Dawn Boulanger, O'Charley's vice president/marketing, tells Marketing Daily the company began researching a new approach because it needed to find a way to stand out from a competitive forest of casual-dining ads that all feature beauty shots of food. "Part of the whole discussion around the new campaign was a need to have something different, because we could have taken all of the competitive spots, put them together, and they all looked the same." She adds that although the rolls are central images, each of the spots focuses on a particular promotion, and that there will be three TV spots initially, growing to six spots over the course of the campaign. "It's the most comprehensive campaign we have ever done." Next week, the company launches therolls.com, which, among other things, includes a game wherein site visitors can slice--virtually--into a roll with a knife. There's also a contest on the site, as well as streaming digital versions of the spots and a bit of mythologizing via an animated fable showing how O'Charley's roll becomes a "roll" model for the industry. "What began as an advertising campaign has mushroomed into a fully integrated marketing program that resonates completely throughout the company," said Jeff Warne, O'Charley's concept president, in a release. He said the campaign is consequent to a focus-group study of customers who "just lit up about the rolls when we asked them to identify what they associate most with the O'Charley's experience." The company recently completed an eight-city tour to its restaurants, teaching managers about the new campaign, focusing on roll preparation and service to the guest and introducing its new beverage program.
So Monday afternoon my daughter asks if we can order a Domino's pizza so she and her sister can better study for their exams today (good luck, kids!). Sure, I say, and even volunteer to do it because I've just read a news item by one of our writers about the company's new online elements (see news brief in this issue). It's as easy to order as it ever was--perhaps more so, but not much more so to this Baby Boomer mom. But the really cool thing is the trademarked and patent-pending Pizza Tracker that I could not take my eyes off of! "Mark began custom making your order at 5:15 p.m.," it began moments after I clicked "Place order." "Mark put your order in the oven at 5:23 p.m." A horizontal thermometer-looking design kept track of our pizza step by step. It was like the time I virtually watched the iPod Nanos I ordered for the kids one Christmas leave China, land in Portland or Seattle, move on to somewhere in Indiana and then land in Hartford before arriving at my doorstep. As I watched--and edited the stories you're reading here--the "Fact-o-matic" kept issuing CNN-like bulletins such as "The entire order taking and pizza production process takes about 12-15 minutes" and "Our drivers cover 9 million miles each week in the U.S." The first stage, "Order placed," pulsed red then turned solid red when it was finished. Ditto "prep," "bake" and "box." "We packaged your order and placed it in a warm HeatWave™ bag at 5:28 p.m." "Mark stepped outside for a smoke at 5:29 p.m." Kidding! (Mark is the owner of this particular Domino's.) I was so impressed! Imagine--my pizza order being tracked and tagged. I felt important. But then, it began to dawn ... nobody at Domino's was actually logging each step. My gawd, if you're making enough pizzas to stretch to the moon and back, no company could possibly hire enough staff to log individual pizza times. No, it had to be that each step is an average and that after you order the pizza, it takes X amount of minutes to "prep" it and to bake it and then to box it. But this is where I began to be concerned. After all, Domino's was "estimating," as its "legal stuff" says at the bottom of the page, that the pizza would be at my door in 30 minutes. I had ordered it at 5:15; I estimated delivery at ... oh, 5:45. I watched and watched, deflecting queries from anxious reporters, ignoring newly arriving e-mails. I was thinking, okay, it should take 10 minutes minimum to get to my door from the Domino's. Any second now it's going to update itself. It's going to say our pizza is on its way. Alas, "our delivery expert, Tom, left the store with your order at 5:40 p.m." Fifteen minutes later, Tom was at the door, our dogs announcing his arrival. Tom really was named Tom. That was neat. And he guessed our dogs were German shepherd and shih-tzu (close! lab and who knows what, but partly shih-tzu). After I paid him I raced back to the computer, expecting to see the delivery time updated. But, alack, no dice. I wanted it to record delivery like UPS. It was delicious, I discovered, as I was "forced" to eat it, one daughter having just that hour declared herself to be ... a vegan. Sigh.