I’m sorry to report that Eastwood Insurance’s radio advertising hasn’t improved since it was featured in an earlier Monday Radio Commercial Smackdown.
Here’s the latest.
The only real selling point of this spot is “$37 down and low monthly payments” — which is mentioned in the opening line and never again. By the end of the commercial — heck, by the very next sentence — the listener has forgotten all about that.
“But Dan, what about the fact that she’s been an agent there for 17 years?”
That’s nice. But it doesn’t sell insurance.
They give both a terrible vanity phone number (1-800-470-2-SAV) and its numeric equivalent.
Here Comes The Clue Train.
If you give both a vanity number and its numeric equivalent and a listener wants to write down one of them (unlikely as that is with this commercial), the listener will write down the numeric equivalent and ignore the vanity number.
“But some people won’t be able to write it down, and we want them to remember it. That’s why we have the vanity number, too!”
Chug Chug Chug
Oops, the Clue Train’s job isn’t done yet. Nobody will remember “1-800-470-2-SAV.”
They give two Calls To Action (call or visit their website). That’s one too many. (Multiple Calls To Action depress total overall response.)
And then the friendly, “been here 17 years” agent is made to look ridiculous as she’s pressed into service to deliver the fast-talking disclaimer. I hope at least she was paid a bonus for voicing the radio commercial.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Nobody will remember “1-800-470-2-SAV.”Boy, I’ll say… even you couldn’t remember it long enough to write that the vanity number is 1-877-490-2-SAV, and I’m sure you listened to it several times.
I also listened several times in a vain effort to make out what she was saying in the copy… not that I care – I’d tuned out – given a delivery that is simply not believable. Makes the point for you, doncha think?
Steve C.
I don’t think she got paid for the spot because she certainly has NO enthusiasm or interest detectable in her voiceover.
Just plain stupid.
Dan, WE get it. Here’s the problem: How do we convince of these missteps:
A: AE’s who put more weight in their client’s desire to make every bad choice in commercial composition over an “informed” approach, and;
B: Our clients who, whatever their business and avocation, seem to hold the opinion that the only ones who know how to write a commercial are themselves – and are reinforced through silence from the AE which is afraid to say “no” for fear of losing a buy?
I’ve actually bypassed on some learning opportunities in the past after having been repeatedly, thoroughly and figuratively “beaten to a pulp” over the approaches I use to write an engaging, effective message. This counterintuitive stuff is 180 degrees out-of-phase with what the clients believe, and in hard times, they’re less willing than ever to violate their paradigm. I start to sense futility in going even further away from their antiquated opinions.
Unfortunately, their insistance on presenting mediocrity would seem to condemns them to experience a perceived failure of radio advertising…and guess who receives the blame for that?
@ Kevin: Your first question: Alas, it’s management’s job to hire and train good AEs. Other than trying to be a good influence and making an initial attempt to enlighten them, there’s not much a copywriter or producer can do about that problem. Unless, of course, the AE recognizes his/her ignorance of the field and asks you to teach them.
Your second question: As it happens, I do offer something I created specifically to address the problem: How To Educate Your Clients
Unfortunately I’ve worked with a few GMs and GSMs who believe that the client is always right and they should always have the final say on their commercials.
Then when the campaign didn’t work and the client blames the station those same GMs said to me, “well it’s because you’re obviously not very good at production.”
I’m no longer working for those a****les.