Comparative Advertising: When Competitors Get Clever
Phillipa Holland takes a look at big brand advertising, both recent and historic, and decides whether the one-upmanship of comparative advertising is cunningly clever or just punching below the belt.
At Fellows and Associates we believe that we are able to offer an alternative way of thinking and, because of this, we have always made the conscious decision to separate ourselves from our competitors and communicate our alternative brand message through our advertising. Whilst regular readers of the CIPA Journal would be forgiven for thinking our chosen images and tag lines can sometimes seem slightly out of kilter with the IP industry, it has certainly worked in strengthening our position by offering something a little ‘different’ to our audience. And although we actively try to differentiate ourselves from other IP recruiters, we never resort to underhand tactics (well, most of the time).
With this in mind, it got me thinking about campaigns where big brands have not been afraid to directly reference their competitors and whether it worked for or against them in the battle for the customer.
Lidl versus the World
Since its introduction to the UK in 1994, Lidl has risen from the underdog to the people’s champion through a combination of discount prices and clever marketing campaigns. Lidl’s most recent advertising focuses on demonstrating to consumers their commitment to providing high quality products at a low cost. They achieve this through showing blind taste testing with their own products pitted against a well-known high street alternative.
Lidl are not afraid to directly reference their competitors in their advertising and have even been known to go one step further by ridiculing and appropriating specific campaigns as their own. For example, during the launch of the Morrisons Match &More card in October last year, which was the first loyalty card of its kind to price match Lidl. This prompted Lidl to respond with a text heavy print advert explaining the laborious steps consumers would have to take in order to take advantage of the price match promise, but also reminded them that they could just simply shop at Lidl instead. The misplacement of the Sainsbury’s 50p Challenge poster meant for staff’s eyes only led to Lidl releasing a very similar advert, but instead of encouraging customers to spend an extra 50p they encouraged them to save it.
There is no question that Lidl has risen in the ranks as a credible contender over the past few years, with a consistent increase in market share and an ever growing number adding to the Lidl classes. However this could be down to a number of things. It could be argued that consumers post-recession have become more money savvy and are out for a bargain; perhaps recent scandals weathered by their top competitors may have prompted the change; or maybe the stigma attached to cheap products not necessarily meaning quality products has finally been shaken off.
Pepsi versus Coke
Prior to Lidl, the blind taste testing approach was famously pioneered by Pepsi in the 1970s as a way of trying to grab some of the market share from Coca Cola. Customers were encouraged to take part in the Pepsi Challenge where they would sample two cola drinks, one being Coca Cola and the other Pepsi, and choose which they preferred. The results, surprisingly for some, were in favour of Pepsi, leading to the Pepsi Challenge featuring heavily in their campaigns moving forward.
In retaliation, Coca Cola made the radical decision to change the formula of their product, which according to research had fared better than both Pepsi and the original formula in independent taste tests. However it failed spectacularly and they soon reverted back to what they knew (and sold) best, but not before Pepsi managed to get some gloating in.
It seems that over the years the Pepsi Challenge has lost its momentum, with Coca Cola keeping hold of their majority market share. However, this year Pepsi has introduced a new and improved campaign but with a slightly different angle. The Challenge will focus on social responsibility and popular culture and will set challenges involving social media, technology, music and sports. Although this change in direction hasn’t stopped Pepsi taking a dig at Coke (and vice versa) every once in a while.
PlayStation versus Xbox
Since the launch of the Xbox in 2001 there has always been some level of competition between Microsoft and Sony. However this battle was mostly fought between the gamers, as opposed to corporate mudslinging. That was until the run up to the release of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4 in 2013. There was a fair amount of confusion surrounding the game sharing capabilities of the Xbox One and the fact they would prohibit the sharing of games between consoles, effectively rendering the pre-owned market useless (and making gamers who share amongst their friends rather annoyed). PlayStation took this confusion as an opportunity for a rather clever viral video, in which they demonstrate how a game is shared by PlayStation users.
Of course Microsoft eventually reversed their decision to limit the sharing capabilities of the Xbox One.
Mac versus Windows
Microsoft never retaliated to the Sony’s viral video (well, to be honest there wasn’t much for them to come back from), but they did hit back when confronted with Apple’s iconic Get a Mac campaign in 2006.
The campaign aired over three years and in six countries, and featured actors portraying a modern and confident Mac alongside an awkward and unsure PC. The adverts were bold as they not only directly made comparisons between the two competitors, but also went to great lengths to portray Microsoft Windows and the PC in a negative light. Microsoft responded with I’m a PC, which broke down the stereotypes established in Apple’s Get a Mac and illustrated that Windows had users from all different types of background.
There are countless examples of comparative advertising, especially since the introduction of social media allowing an increase in ways in which brands can communicate quickly and effectively with their audience. These types of campaigns catch the attention of consumers, and whether people think they are morally correct or not, they succeed in generating an interest in their brand and encourage conversation and debate. Nonetheless, in order to avoid complaints (or of course legal action from the subject of the advert) there are simple guidelines that need to be kept in mind in order for the campaign to be successful. For example objective claims, such as those made by Pepsi and Lidl, need to be accompanied by quantifiable evidence and those which are subjective will be better received if presented with humour, such as Mac and PlayStation.
So if we ever directly reference any of our competitors in our future campaigns, we’ll make sure we can either back up our claims or we’ll try and make you laugh.