As I say each year prior to these comments, I believe effective ads should lead to action. I realize that some disagree with me, and it is reasonable for Super Bowl ads to evoke other valuable emotions on the part of the viewer to create further connection to the brand (to wit the Budweiser Clydesdale ad). However, there aren’t may companies in a position to use millions of dollars to do that effectively.
In addition, Super Bowl ads must be distinctive. After all, it is the world’s largest advertising stage and expectations are high. I felt this year’s “crop” was mostly ho-hum, and, of course, still requires commentary. Though the power outage likely got more coverage than did the ads.
One of the most effective ads of the group focused on cars was the Mercedes CLA ad. It was right on target, funny and delivered a valuable message. To bad they either intentionally or stupidly offended Free Masons by having the devil wear a Free Mason ring.
The Audi ad were also good in that it was entertaining, clever and delivered a message. Unlike the VW ad, which prompted a lot of controversy over nothing, and was not a particularly good ad in terms of delivering a useful message about VW.
Hyundai ran several ads, most of which were forgettable, but the Sonata Turbo ad was funny and on message, demonstrating that given enough chances their agency can get it right.
Lastly, as regards cars, I felt the folks at cars.com did a good job with their ad. On message, on target and well done.
Just like for the football players, the Super Bowl is a demanding venue. Different people have different viewpoints, but at the end of it all, results are what matter. As long as somebody remembered to ask “what results are we looking for” and have a way to measure if they achieved same, I am good with their efforts.