Super Bowl Ads that Confused Us All

BlackBerry and Best Buy are two struggling companies with a whole lot in common when it comes to their failing business models and slump in stock sales. Now they are also two companies who have recently given the world two terrible Super Bowl 2013 ads which don’t seem to have much hold on consumers.

BlackBerry’s recent introduction of its new Z10 smartphone, which was unveiled last week was intended to keep its current customers engaged with the brand while enticing its former customers to return. The product itself could be what BlackBerry desperately needs to get back on track, and with the right ad campaign, they could have done so. But instead of showing consumers what their product does, BlackBerry did a full 180 and gave us this monster of an ad.

Meanwhile, Best Buy featured an ad which portrays Amy Poehler as a shopper, harassing a sales associate with personal questions. The ad has hints of humor but confuses consumers with non-direct messages and endless questions on what seems to be hundreds of products. With the tagline, “Thousands of Experts Ready to Help,” One would think the commercial would showcase the expert actually answering questions, instead our expert stands dumbfounded and speechless in the wake of the inquisitive tornado that is Amy Poehler.

With Super Bowl 2013 ads being said to average $4 million dollars for each 30-second spot, big box stores like Best Buy battling online competition, and BlackBerry fending off the ever growing iPhone following, it is clear that neither company should invest in risky, unclear and confusing ads. Super Bowl ads have always stressed creativity but with BlackBerry’s flat out weird ad and Best Buy’s borderline obnoxious and aimless ad, it seems as if sense and logic are being removed from the process creating new ads.

GM's Super Bowl commercial helped Ford

Super Bowl Ad Aftermath: Ford Boosted By GM's Fallout?

Playing dirty might be de rigeur in politics, but it seldom helps in selling products—even dusty pickups ravaged by the apocalypse.

That might end up being GM's tough lesson from its Super Bowl XLVI ad which, to some, spoke less about the strengths of GM products than it did attack Ford's reputation for durability and longevity.

GM's Super Bowl commercial helped Ford

Based on traffic and visitor data collected by the shopping and pricing site Kelley Blue Book, more visitors browsed Fordafter the GM commercial—a lot more—even though Ford didn't have a big Super Bowl ad. Whether looking at the controversy in the days surrounding, or specifically at the window of time during and after the ad aired, Fordappeared to benefit most, if an immediate browsing or shopping of new vehicles was the goal.

Full-size pickup truck visitors on Super Bowl Sunday, 2012 - Kelley Blue Book

KBB.com data shows consumer interest in the Silverado lifting during the commercial airing, leveling off after the commercial and declining after the game, as interest in the F-150 surged, curiously. Despite the Silverado's lift during the game, Ford’s F-150 still drew a greater share of week-over-week attention from KBB.com consumers.

In comparing consumer interest on kbb.com among the Full-size truck segment, KBB analyst Akshay Anand noted that the share of visits to the F150 surged over 26-percent week-over-week, while the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 saw a 25-percent drop in traffic during the same period.

“Looking at the data for that whole day, Ford did see some lift, and I don't think that's a coincidence,” said Anand.

That leads to how some might have heard the commercial...something along the lines of this: What kind of truck do you drive to the impending apocalypse? If it's a Ford, oh you sorry sap, you're just not going to make it.

Advertising 101: Don't make the competing product your punchline

And that hits hard at one very important factor: brand loyalty. To many, the commercial was less a declaration of the strengths of GM products than it was the buildup to an attack on Ford's trucks. And it may have sent Ford loyalists to their laptops and tablets to search for reassurance about Ford's reputation, as their GM counterparts gloated and stayed on the sofa.

“Truck owners tend to be more loyal than those in any other segment,” said Anand, and when a product with that level of loyalty is mentioned negatively in an ad, argued Anand, the response is likely to be one that's on the defensive.

Other potential explanations: Ford was mentioned bluntly and clearly right near the end of the ad, so is that somehow the name that stuck with viewers? Or does the lesson to be learned really have more to do with etiquette?

It is, after all, one of the first commercials in some time to blatantly call out a competing product without mention of a number or metric as basis.