If you are you are to watch TV these days you know that commercials are taking a more comedic approach to get their names out. Some make you LOL and some just make you want to change the channel so you don't have to see that annoying commercial anymore. One commercial that stands out to me and a lot of my friends is the Dikembe Mutombo "Geiko" commercial. Mutombo is a retired NBA player know for his size and blocking shots, so Geiko knowing that they can target any Basketball fan took advantage of his skill and made it into a successful ad.
Watch the Commercial by clicking the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_0fyUYB3cA
Although I am not looking at getting Geiko right now, this commercial makes me laugh every time and I know every time that its Geiko that put the ad out so that way the name is always in my head.
Do you think that humor is the best way to advertise on TV these days, or does it make a company look less serious than it should?
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Sunday, February 10, 2013
In response to Jade Brulette
When it comes to the case of the RED T-shirt, I believe that all of the proceeds need to go to the charity. This was supposed to be a huge fund raiser and it ended up being just a good when with Gap keeping over 50% of their profits. That is millions of dollars that could have saved even more lives but instead went to an already successful business.
The biggest shock to me is that Bono himself told Gap to keep that amount of profit. He claims to be this "superman" lifesaver but instead is telling a big name corporation to keep more money than they donate?? Something doesn't seem right. The t shirts were going to sell regardless and that alone would bring people into the stores and make them look around and buy more products. Gap would have helped their image much more if they took zero profit and more people would support the cause and the store by buying other shirts and jeans.
Do you agree that keeping over 50% over the profits was a bad move for for Gap's business and their ethics?
The biggest shock to me is that Bono himself told Gap to keep that amount of profit. He claims to be this "superman" lifesaver but instead is telling a big name corporation to keep more money than they donate?? Something doesn't seem right. The t shirts were going to sell regardless and that alone would bring people into the stores and make them look around and buy more products. Gap would have helped their image much more if they took zero profit and more people would support the cause and the store by buying other shirts and jeans.
Do you agree that keeping over 50% over the profits was a bad move for for Gap's business and their ethics?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)