It’s this time of year when marketers get excited about what the BIG brands are ‘bringing’ to the Super Bowl spectacular. And that is the way it has been since 1984 when Apple changed the face of SuperBowl advertising with their spectacular and unique way to do what they have always done: change things in their favour by doing things differntly. Add colour in a black and white world.
My journey learning about Apple and SuperBowl as a young academic was one of the happiest I can remember. Brands such as Budweiser, Reebok & Nike of course, who didn’t play with the rule book. How exciting that was to show 19 year somethings that you don’t have to play ball (OK they were the big brand guys – but they wanted to be the bigger guys)! And in the 90’s when the economy was booming, the advertising world was a raging bull. There were no limits. Long lunches. Longer lunches. And a large bar tab.
I digress! Terry Tate – Reebok. Gold.
Where is the product being used? It was all about humour.
Such a wonderful war started and has really not stopped with Nike V Reebok V Adidas. Another blog post warrants each brand’s journey.
30 years ago back in 1984, Apple defined the Super Bowl Commercial as a cultural phenomenon. Prior to Super Bowl XVIII, nobody watched the game “just for the commercials” — but one epic TV spot by Apple – which nearly didn’t get to air, directed by sci-fi legend Ridley Scott, changed all of that. And it nearly didn’t run… The Apple Board members hated the ad – why? Again, they didn’t show the functionality & usage of the product.
Since then, major advertisers have used the game, paying as much as US $4 million for one 30-second slot as of 2013, (excluding production & celebrity expenses) to showcase their work and generate buzz that many people tune into television’s biggest event of the year just to watch the commercials, not just the actual game. Let me take you back to the future!
A little bit of luck 