Is Difficult Really Worth Doing, Honda?
Following up on the post from Luis last week, I saw the Honda spot called Jump that was produced by Wieden + Kennedy. It’s a neat spot, great camera work and music with a little fancy sky diving action. But does it sell cars? They highlight two features in the spot that receive a skydiving visual but that’s it. It doesn’t communicate the features relevant to me in the car and it doesn’t motivate me to want to go test drive an Accord. I don’t see how it supports the Honda brand.
I get the feeling that this spot was produced because it was a really cool creative idea and Honda has a huge budget. It may be part of a bigger campaign that I’m missing but unless you get a free skydiving lesson with the purchase of a new Accord, it proves the disconnect between consumers and the 30 second spot. What do you think? Great approach, I’m going to test drive and Accord or are you reminded why you don’t jump out of airplanes?
Article Tags: 30 Second Spot | Beneath the Brand | Branding | HONDA | Jamey Shiels
Filed under: Advertising, Branding, Business, Campaign Critiques, Jamey Shiels, Miscellaneous, Strategy
For years, I have never been a fan of the Honda auto advertising. Even though RP won tons of awards for comparing a Honda to the stealth bomber - I never got the connection. Was this car invisible to radar?
Honda’s work has always seemed to have a smug, self-righteous tone that prefers to take the high road then sell product features. I guess since everybody already knows how well-built these cars are, they needn’t do much to gain awareness.
20 years ago, a skydive might seem like an outrageous stunt to create awareness. But in today’s world, I agree with you. Big budget execution just for the sake of spending big money.