Comments on: GoDaddy’s Super Bowl ad play – shrewd or stale? http://www.valleyprblog.com/hype/godaddys-super-bowl-ad-play-shrewd-or-stale/ A (dry heated) group blog from Phoenix, Arizona on public relations, marketing and social media Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:24:00 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: The Great Go Daddy Debate: Go Brand or Go Home(page)? | Valley PR Blog http://www.valleyprblog.com/hype/godaddys-super-bowl-ad-play-shrewd-or-stale/comment-page-1/#comment-1014 The Great Go Daddy Debate: Go Brand or Go Home(page)? | Valley PR Blog Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:00:22 +0000 http://www.valleyprblog.com/?p=859#comment-1014 [...] with this year’s ad, Go Daddy proved what we’ve been saying all along: its advertising strategy is eroding its brand equity. Go Daddy is becoming “the brand that [...] [...] with this year’s ad, Go Daddy proved what we’ve been saying all along: its advertising strategy is eroding its brand equity. Go Daddy is becoming “the brand that [...]

]]> By: Miguel C. http://www.valleyprblog.com/hype/godaddys-super-bowl-ad-play-shrewd-or-stale/comment-page-1/#comment-1016 Miguel C. Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:24:32 +0000 http://www.valleyprblog.com/?p=859#comment-1016 We just posted our 4th annual study of how well super bowl advertisers integrated online and offline advertising - we'll be writing more about this on our <a href="http://www.searchviews.com" rel="nofollow">blog</a>, but the preliminary findings are already up on our site: <a href="http://reprisemedia.com/scorecard.aspx" rel="nofollow">Super Bowl XLII Scorecard</a>. We just posted our 4th annual study of how well super bowl advertisers integrated online and offline advertising – we’ll be writing more about this on our blog, but the preliminary findings are already up on our site: Super Bowl XLII Scorecard.

]]> By: Dan Wool http://www.valleyprblog.com/hype/godaddys-super-bowl-ad-play-shrewd-or-stale/comment-page-1/#comment-1015 Dan Wool Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:27:26 +0000 http://www.valleyprblog.com/?p=859#comment-1015 The tactic is played out. It's an eye-roller. The first year, it worked great, because it probably wasn't intentional. In the second year, an encore -- after millions of dollars of free international press -- was understandable. Now it's just silly. They deliberately game the ad to fail the censors and appeal to everyone due to reverse psychology. But when the hype is manufactured and we then watch the end result on Super Bowl (oops - "Big Game") Sunday and wonder "Is that it?"...it doesn't help their branding. Meanwhile, Go Daddy has lined up great celebrity endorsements (Chad Johnson, Amanda Beard, etc.) and can't figure out how to use them any other way. The tactic is played out. It’s an eye-roller. The first year, it worked great, because it probably wasn’t intentional. In the second year, an encore — after millions of dollars of free international press — was understandable.

Now it’s just silly. They deliberately game the ad to fail the censors and appeal to everyone due to reverse psychology. But when the hype is manufactured and we then watch the end result on Super Bowl (oops – “Big Game”) Sunday and wonder “Is that it?”…it doesn’t help their branding. Meanwhile, Go Daddy has lined up great celebrity endorsements (Chad Johnson, Amanda Beard, etc.) and can’t figure out how to use them any other way.

]]>