Not sure about in house - seems like you have more flexibility with outside teams. If you don't like the direction things are going, you can always try a different firm next time. Not so here. But I don't know many details of what Apple is doing. I will say the orchestra one was not good to me. It was nice for a mini movie, but it didn't get across the feeling of apple. It was cold, muted, slightly depressing and lonely.. I liked it when the commercials were all about the products. The hero!
What a shitty, sensational article lacking in any kind of context or perspective, and making grand assumptions based on near meaningless data. Apple's recent ads have been brilliant. For those in this thread boldly proclaiming how "profoundly stupid" this move is, and how its known that companies cant do their own advertising, you're forgetting the fact that Apple is not your typical company, and have tourinely succeeded when the established thinking proclaimed they weren't supposed to succeed, doing what they "shouldn't" have done. There's no reason to think Apple can't succeed at this too, and having more in-house control over adverting has a ton of advantages, including the fact that they know their product more than anyone else.
Some of you can't see a foot beyond your own noses, and its as if history has taught you nothing about what Apple can and can't do.
I think Bloomberg's responsible for the figure rather than the pollster, but what a terrible figure. Bars to the left and right of a center point for each ad (with the other value presumably set to zero) because the designer was too lazy to figure out how to color bars differently? It's just unbalanced and ungainly, and makes the reader have to wonder why the data's presented that way before concluding that there's no good reason for it. If the figure were clearly attributable to Ace Metrix, it would offer further reason for doubting their ability to judge aesthetics.
Why is Apple bringing the ads inside. Leaks? If apples pipeline is really as great as Apple says it is, they may be fringing the ads inside just for that reason.
What leaks? I know that when Apple launches a new product, they've already shot a commercial. The production crew/actors in the ads of course have signed strict NDAs. So again, what leaks?
What a shitty, sensational article lacking in any kind of context or perspective, and making grand assumptions based on near meaningless data. Apple's recent ads have been brilliant. For those in this thread boldly proclaiming how "profoundly stupid" this move is, and how its known that companies cant do their own advertising, you're forgetting the fact that Apple is not your typical company, and have tourinely succeeded when the established thinking proclaimed they weren't supposed to succeed, doing what they "shouldn't" have done. There's no reason to think Apple can't succeed at this too, and having more in-house control over adverting has a ton of advantages, including the fact that they know their product more than anyone else.
Some of you can't see a foot beyond your own noses, and its as if history has taught you nothing about what Apple can and can't do.
Yes, I can't really tell the ad campaigns apart. I like the internally created ads, like Your Verse, which did the impossible: stop talking about tech in terms of specs and talk instead about how it affects your life. And TBWA has done a very good job for Apple. Sure, there were plenty of stinkers (Lemmings), but also many more incredible ads and marketing campaigns. I don't know what this scoring data really means, other than do the ads make people smile or frown? Is that ultimately a meaningful metric?
First, it is sad that other sites are posting numbers collected during the analysis while this site is not.
One Apple ad scored 611 while a TBWA ad scored 696. These scores tell me Apple IS NOT THAT FAR OFF THE MARK WITH ADS!
Apple is doing EXACTLY what Apple does... Learn from previous efforts to be better in the future.
Ding Apple for scoring lower than TBWA, not being an equal to Google Maps from Day One, etc. But look at what is truly happening. Apple is learning and improving. iTunes U has been drastically improved as reported by other sites then by AI. Maps is being improved nightly as reported by other sites then by AI. I have no doubts ads will be improved by Apple and reported on by other sites then by AI.
My take on this is that Apple opened their in-house ad shop to put TBWA on their toes... this isn't saying Apple is serious about their in-house shop, but it would be embarrassing for TBWA to be shown up by an upstart. The two will work a lot harder to shine and for Apple it's a Win-Win.
This is ridiculous. Ace Metrix do not know the real purpose/aim of these ads but you can bet Apple are not creating these ads aimed purely (possibly not even remotely) at the "viewer scores" determined by Ace Metrix.
Until we know for a fact what Apple's aims are and can reliably determine a particular ads effectiveness against those/that specific criteria then the whole process of trying to determine effectiveness is futile.
There are many reasons for creating ads and increasing sales might not even be one of them!
Then again, it might be the only reason. So it could be that these ads created by Apple are far better than those made with TBWA or it could be as extreme in the opposite direction. Basically this "report" is a waste of time and effort, serving only to advertise/raise the profile of Ace Metrix.
The Dead Poets Society script was to be used as inspiration for Think Different so it makes more sense that it originated at TBWA. Apple might have done some of the scenarios depicted in the overall campaign themselves though.
The fact this TV audience sample ranks the Gigantic ad so highly suggests a lot about their preferences. If a TV audience ranked Justin Bieber more highly than John Lennon, should Apple feel they'd have to pander to them? I don't think so.
"It's madly building an internal agency that it's telling recruits will eventually number 1,000 -- the size of Grey Advertising. It's pitting TBWA/MAL against this internal agency with "jump balls" to mine the best creative ideas, a controversial tactic with outside agencies, let alone an internal one. It's going after some of adland's boldest-faced names to staff its in-house shop -- in some cases, it's even poached executives from TBWA/MAL. And, in what once would have been seen as a sacrilegious breach of the Apple-MAL bond, it's been inviting some of the ad industry's top shops to pitch on major projects."
If they do manage to get a team of 1,000 people, they can have subteams compete for the best ideas and you know these people will keep up with ads created by outside agencies, it's not like they're going to live in a bubble.
It is exceedingly rare for companies to have successful in-house advertising departments. There are a lot of reasons for the failures that inevitably occur, but the biggest one is that the creatives are not left alone. Every red-butt VP and division manager thinks they know what makes a good ad and tend to interfere with the creative process. However, the ads Apple created themselves are pretty good and have decent metrics. Naturally, Apple would be the one company to make this work. Time will tell.
That's just it - Apple are unique. Remember what computers looked like before Apple? Or mp3 players?
They have so much money that they are like a whole world in themselves. Just because an advertising team is in-house doesn't mean that they can't be fired.
I think that a lot of Apple's recent advertising -- whether produced internally or externally -- is self-conscious and tepid. They've just not been up to Apple's traditionally high standards. In particular, the music and the narration often grate.
I think that a lot of Apple's recent advertising -- whether produced internally or externally -- is self-conscious and tepid. They've just not been up to Apple's traditionally high standards. In particular, the music and the narration often grate.
This is just my subjective view.
They used to make humorous adverts:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
I love the one with the Vista wheel of fortune ("didn't you make this?"). The ad with the Manilla envelope was iconic.
I guess the Genius ads were supposed to continue the humour element but they didn't hit the right note. It's hard to keep making iconic ads when there's not a new product category. I don't think they've been doing too badly though. I liked the following ads:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
Having a lack of humour is where Samsung's line ad did some damage because it tried to make Apple look like the stuffy corporation. It has to be done right though or it can end up far worse.
Some incredibly good memories there from watching! Thanks.
I stopped watching after the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" series so as to not get depressed. That was perhaps the last truly, insanely great burst of advertising creativity from Apple. To this day, I believe that series was largely responsible for changing people's mindsets about Macs, and Apple more broadly (although, Ballmer helped).
As a creative director on Madison Ave during advertising's heyday I agree with this observation. IMO neither TBWA or Apple has produced breakthrough creative in years. Apple ads conform more to the Proctor & Gamble formula these days, frosted pablum that won't rock the boat or make any waves. Back in the day Jay Chiat would rather have quit the account than produce worn out formula ads.
I agree with takeo. There needs to be an element of objectivity and perspective in the process, plus on occasion 'razzmatazz'. I do think though, as a user and enthusiast, that Apple Apple marketing, including it's own sales website, is rather lame and, dare I say, dated and 'in the clouds'. They don't do justice to an amazing range of stellar products.
Comments
Why isn't it mentioned that Ace Metrix has Samsung as a customer?
What a shitty, sensational article lacking in any kind of context or perspective, and making grand assumptions based on near meaningless data. Apple's recent ads have been brilliant. For those in this thread boldly proclaiming how "profoundly stupid" this move is, and how its known that companies cant do their own advertising, you're forgetting the fact that Apple is not your typical company, and have tourinely succeeded when the established thinking proclaimed they weren't supposed to succeed, doing what they "shouldn't" have done. There's no reason to think Apple can't succeed at this too, and having more in-house control over adverting has a ton of advantages, including the fact that they know their product more than anyone else.
Some of you can't see a foot beyond your own noses, and its as if history has taught you nothing about what Apple can and can't do.
I think Bloomberg's responsible for the figure rather than the pollster, but what a terrible figure. Bars to the left and right of a center point for each ad (with the other value presumably set to zero) because the designer was too lazy to figure out how to color bars differently? It's just unbalanced and ungainly, and makes the reader have to wonder why the data's presented that way before concluding that there's no good reason for it. If the figure were clearly attributable to Ace Metrix, it would offer further reason for doubting their ability to judge aesthetics.
What leaks? I know that when Apple launches a new product, they've already shot a commercial. The production crew/actors in the ads of course have signed strict NDAs. So again, what leaks?
Yes, I can't really tell the ad campaigns apart. I like the internally created ads, like Your Verse, which did the impossible: stop talking about tech in terms of specs and talk instead about how it affects your life. And TBWA has done a very good job for Apple. Sure, there were plenty of stinkers (Lemmings), but also many more incredible ads and marketing campaigns. I don't know what this scoring data really means, other than do the ads make people smile or frown? Is that ultimately a meaningful metric?
My take on this is that Apple opened their in-house ad shop to put TBWA on their toes... this isn't saying Apple is serious about their in-house shop, but it would be embarrassing for TBWA to be shown up by an upstart. The two will work a lot harder to shine and for Apple it's a Win-Win.
Until we know for a fact what Apple's aims are and can reliably determine a particular ads effectiveness against those/that specific criteria then the whole process of trying to determine effectiveness is futile.
There are many reasons for creating ads and increasing sales might not even be one of them!
Then again, it might be the only reason. So it could be that these ads created by Apple are far better than those made with TBWA or it could be as extreme in the opposite direction. Basically this "report" is a waste of time and effort, serving only to advertise/raise the profile of Ace Metrix.
The "Your Verse" campaign is being tagged as TBWA in a few online sites as is the Pencil one:
http://www.adforum.com/creative-work/ad/player/34491355
http://www.adforum.com/creative-work/ad/player/34493296
http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/2014/apple-ipad-air-your-verse-anthem/ ("The Your Verse campaign was developed at TBWA\Media Arts Lab.")
http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/tag/tbwamedia-arts-lab/
http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/tv-commercials/ipad-air-your-verse-anthem-18667755/
https://www.facebook.com/TBWASingapore/posts/610337852353322
The Dead Poets Society script was to be used as inspiration for Think Different so it makes more sense that it originated at TBWA. Apple might have done some of the scenarios depicted in the overall campaign themselves though.
The fact this TV audience sample ranks the Gigantic ad so highly suggests a lot about their preferences. If a TV audience ranked Justin Bieber more highly than John Lennon, should Apple feel they'd have to pander to them? I don't think so.
Apple hired some of the people from TBWA:
http://adage.com/article/agency-news/apple-marketing-a-game/293605/
"It's madly building an internal agency that it's telling recruits will eventually number 1,000 -- the size of Grey Advertising. It's pitting TBWA/MAL against this internal agency with "jump balls" to mine the best creative ideas, a controversial tactic with outside agencies, let alone an internal one. It's going after some of adland's boldest-faced names to staff its in-house shop -- in some cases, it's even poached executives from TBWA/MAL. And, in what once would have been seen as a sacrilegious breach of the Apple-MAL bond, it's been inviting some of the ad industry's top shops to pitch on major projects."
If they do manage to get a team of 1,000 people, they can have subteams compete for the best ideas and you know these people will keep up with ads created by outside agencies, it's not like they're going to live in a bubble.
It is exceedingly rare for companies to have successful in-house advertising departments. There are a lot of reasons for the failures that inevitably occur, but the biggest one is that the creatives are not left alone. Every red-butt VP and division manager thinks they know what makes a good ad and tend to interfere with the creative process. However, the ads Apple created themselves are pretty good and have decent metrics. Naturally, Apple would be the one company to make this work. Time will tell.
That's just it - Apple are unique. Remember what computers looked like before Apple? Or mp3 players?
They have so much money that they are like a whole world in themselves. Just because an advertising team is in-house doesn't mean that they can't be fired.
This is just my subjective view.
Jobs recorded a version of "Here's to the crazy ones". Isn't it about time they used it?
I'd like to hear it also read by Tim, Jonathan and Craig.
They used to make humorous adverts:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
I love the one with the Vista wheel of fortune ("didn't you make this?"). The ad with the Manilla envelope was iconic.
I guess the Genius ads were supposed to continue the humour element but they didn't hit the right note. It's hard to keep making iconic ads when there's not a new product category. I don't think they've been doing too badly though. I liked the following ads:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
Having a lack of humour is where Samsung's line ad did some damage because it tried to make Apple look like the stuffy corporation. It has to be done right though or it can end up far worse.
They used to make humorous adverts:
Some incredibly good memories there from watching! Thanks.
I stopped watching after the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" series so as to not get depressed. That was perhaps the last truly, insanely great burst of advertising creativity from Apple. To this day, I believe that series was largely responsible for changing people's mindsets about Macs, and Apple more broadly (although, Ballmer helped).
I enjoyed those ads, Marvin.
That manila/Air ad is amazing; one of the best!