« Doritos announces final five consumer-created ads | Main | Superbowl advertisers are missing the real game »

Doritos Ads -- More evaluation

Yesterday, I ranked the five final ads in the Doritos "Crash the Superbowl" contest based on my gut reaction. Today I ask more rigorous questions -- and change my ranking slightly...

The first question: Do these ads meet the standards of a "real" agency? To answer this question, I had to travel back in time to put myself in the mindset of my ad agency days, ie, if I were the management supervisor on the Doritos account, would I feel confident presenting these ideas to the client? The answer is a definite yes. In fact, at times I had to present much worse work and try to sell it to my client!

But I don't believe agencies are in danger of being put out of business by Ad Age's "Agency of the Year" -- the consumer. If every brand were to run a contest like this for every new campaign, the novelty would quickly wear off and they would receive no submissions. I do wonder if networks of freelancers will crop up to compete for assignments at a fraction of a Madison Avenue fee.

But agencies will face tough questions about why they need to spend $350,000 or more to shoot an ad when these consumers delivered quite good production values on a shoestring.

The second question: How good are these ads, really? How well do they accomplish Doritos' branding and sales objectives? To answer this, I evaluated the ideas by five criteria; definitions of these criteria and their weightings are below. Here are the grades (click to enlarge):

Doritos_grades_7    

These grades confirm my rating of "Live the Flavor" and "Checkout Girl" as the top two ads, "Duct Tape" and "Chip Lover's Dream" move up but "Mousetrap" drops to the bottom.

In my next installment, I'll do my best to channel Bob Garfield and review each ad.

Here are the definitions and weighting of the criteria:

Strategic fit: 40%. Call me a stickler, I don't care who creates the ad I insist that it fits the brand's strategy. I've made the assumption that their target audience is young men; the rules of the contest allude to attributes like boldness, flavor, and the action the attributes drive.

Quality of idea: 30%. I'm also a believer in the Big Idea: is the fundamental idea driving the ad compelling and engaging?

Art Direction: 10%. Art Directors are responsible for casting, sets, props, and the grapic design of the spot. Grades are based on the quality of these elements.

Copywriting: 10%. Interestingly, only two ads --"Checkout Girl" and "Duct Tape" -- have a spoken script. But copywriters are also responsible for the storyline of the ad. The stronger, tighter, and more complete the story, the higher the grade.

Production: 10%. This criterion includes the quality of the finished video, the acting and direction, and additional special effects included.

Posted by Jim Nail on January 10, 2007 at 11:22 PM | Email this post Permalink
Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/331182/7453393

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Doritos Ads -- More evaluation:

Comments

Hey thanks for the Bs and the A. This is the first TV commercial my brother and I have ever done, so we're honored to have had both our submissions make the top 8, and one in the top five against pros in the business... so I'll take a B, it could be worse! HAHA. We actually entered this contest thinking of Doritos as our "client" and here are some things I think is good about ours, that the average Joe out there voting may not know:

1. We're the only finalist using the Doritos Slogan SNACK STRONG. If you visit www.doritos.com you'll see their "Snack Strong Productions" under construction web site, and it's a slogan they want to keep and move forward with.

2. If the commercial plays in the background, and all you do is HEAR it, ours is the only one that clearly says the word DORITOS. Though chip lovers dream mumbles it at the end, and checkout girl does list off flavors.

3. If you saw the commercial but didn't listen to it, ours is still really strong visually. And for those people out there who mute or ignore the tv during commercials (obviously not during the super bowl!)

4. With regard to quality, the jumpcut site compressed everyone's commercials, and quality varied for us all, and I'm sure isn't near what the original submission is. If I'm correct, the other four shot digital, and we actually shot on film, so it's hard to judge everyone's "quality" online without seeing the actual real one.

Final Note: My brother and I have the least amount of training and education in filmmaking (none), so I'm proud of having two submissions (out of two that we submitted) make top 8, and being compared on web sites (like this greeat blog) to all these great competitors! This is also the first time we shot with film, and the learning experience was invaluable.

I can't wait to meet the other finalists in Miami. Should be a blast.

I really enjoyed reading up on your blog here, feel free to contact us after voting, or after the superbowl for a follow up story if you like.

And maybe cast a vote our way! Go Duct Tape!

Thanks.
Joe Herbert

Posted by: Joe Herbert | Jan 12, 2007 5:06:08 PM

Post a comment