Episode 90 - Rexona Pitvertising Ad Reviewed by PensionBee
In this week’s Advertisers Watching Ads, we’re looking at a sports sponsorship advertising moment chosen by Contagious.
Rexona’s armpit logo placement had people talking and maximised their reach in an otherwise saturated environment. Created by Clemenger BBDO, Sydney, this approach had commentators talking and created a buzz in the industry. But does the ad work beyond that bit of logo reach? Is the execution good enough without more purpose?
There’s a tension between reach, short-term PR and long-term brand value here, so what does our guest Jasper Martens (Chief Marketing Officer at PensionBee) make of it? Check out the video to see why he gave this ad a 5 out of 5.
Watch the full episode to find out!
Transcript
Advertisers Watching Ads Episode 90 - Rexona Pitvertising Ad Reviewed by PensionBee
The following transcript is automatically generated so may not be 100% accurate, but will give you a good idea of what was discussed.
Tom Ollerton 0:00
Hello and welcome to Advertisers Watching Ads. My name is Tom Ollerton. I'm the founder of Automated Creative, and this is a weekly show where brands watch other brands' ads and discuss what's good and bad about them.
This week we are brought to you as ever by contagious.com, so those guys helped us find the ad this week. But before we get to the ad, let's meet this week's one and only special guest.
Jasper Martens 0:28
Hello, everybody. I am Jasper Martens and I am the CMO at PensionBee.
Tom Ollerton 0:32
Well, thanks for joining us today. Let's get on and see this week's ad.
It's now customary to give the ad a vote out of five. One, two, three... A five, a five. Fantastic.
Jasper Martens 2:25
Sorry.
Tom Ollerton 2:25
So Rexona's fresh take on advertising in Australia has been hailed as a game changer. They've put their logo on armpits. A more subtle point about the sponsorship is earning a huge amount of views. The most dramatic moments of the game, a move that was a roaring success in the industry. What do you think of this? Do you think this was a good execution, good sponsorship, good creative?
Jasper Martens 2:42
Look, it depends on what you're trying to achieve, right? In this particular case, I guess they're trying to reach as many eligible consumers as they possibly can. And there's so much you can do for your more traditional advertising. Sports sponsorships in particularly can drive you know, you reach tremendous amount of consumers or your target audience. But I think they've, they've got a problem. We've had a similar issue where you are trying to maximize reach and there are so many sponsorships around that market is so saturated and there are logos everywhere. So I think what they've done brilliantly is like they're combining, I would say, their quest for reach. At a very crucial moment in time when the cameras are pointing in this particular part of the game, when the arms are raised. And guess what? They have a deodorant for that. That's the best place where you want to put a logo if you are Rexona. And also, don't forget, people start talking about this. So you've got this awareness, which is almost like, almost a really upper funnel awareness piece. And guess what? Commentators start picking on it. So your press mentions are going through the roof. You're creating these extra brand touches, geniusly talking about Pitvertising, #Pitvertising. And you know what? In this particular case, if I was Rexona, I would love my brand to be soaked in sweat.
Tom Ollerton 3:56
Isn't it just a bit toilet humour? It's armpits. It's a joke. You know, is that the brand they are? My sort of consumer estimation is that it's about sort of control and, you know, being confident that you don't smell bad at the wrong time. It's about sport and achievement and power and strength and all that kind of stuff.
Jasper Martens 4:11
Generally, it's quite a... It's, it's a deodorant. And I think, and I think in the end, you need to go for reach, reach, reach, reach. It's the maximizing the exposure and just... Again, what they're doing, like you can't... Like, I agree. You can't put your whole value proposition on a shirt, under somebody's armpits. You just can put a logo down. And I think if you are a brand with a very broad target audience and you're just maximizing reach at the cheapest possible price, this kind of advertising works.
Tom Ollerton 4:43
It still feels a bit silly to me. It didn't... There's no purpose here. It's like, "Well, we've got loads of views because we stuck it in someone's armpit." Is the next thing going to be someone's crotch? Like, you know. Where does it end? Have it on someone's bum? You know what I mean? Like it's...
Jasper Martens 4:55
That's a good idea. No, okay, I hear you. It's a bit flat, isn't it? It's just the quest for reach and there's nothing more behind it. But I think if you end up making a decision to go into sports advertising because you want to maximize reach, I think this is a clever thing to do. Whether you're going into sports advertising like this, maybe that is another discussion. But I'm just purely looking at like, "Okay, so at Unilever, you are responsible for Rexona, you have decided that sports, sports advertising or sponsoring is a really good way to maximize reach." Your logo is going to get lost in the world of sports advertising. Let me tell you why I am so kind of like black and white on this one. So we do also advertise in English football, Premier League. And any brand or any CMO, any marketer who has been engaging in that world knows how expensive that can be. So a shirt sponsoring, you're talking about millions. Sleeve sponsoring as well. Anything comes at a price. Our brand wasn't, isn't Unilever. Our brand isn't like Kazoo or any other big brand that can actually afford to do a shirt sponsor deal. So we decided to go clever and in our case we are sponsoring at Brentford, but also we are sponsoring the extra time. So we can see, you can show 30 seconds on the LED screen during a home game, fine. That comes with a price. I probably can afford that, but for the kind of same amount of money, we can, you can also decide, I'm only sponsoring extra time. So I'm the only person who's actually interested in when there's an injury because there will be extra time, right? But the beauty of that is that it's different. So for that 2 minutes extra time, suddenly the whole stadium goes yellow and you get the PensionBee advertising. So I get the exposure I want. Now, if you then zoom back to Rexona, they could have done something like that, probably. But they thought, actually we are a deodorant brand and there is a crucial point in a time. So in my case is the extra time. In their case, it's a particular point in the sports itself when the armpits go up, right? And that's where they decided to plant their logo, because everybody will see it. Now you can argue that's a bit cheap and a bit simple, but if you are going into sports, in sponsorships and sports marketing, you have to be clever. Don't just buy off the shelf because it's going to be expensive, you're not getting the reach you want anyway.
Tom Ollerton 5:07
If you going to follow that through, isn't there... Wouldn't it make more sense to have something around the end of the match? You know, you're finishing, you've played football and now it's time to hit the showers. It's time to freshen up. Whereas like, it's not an occasion that someone goes like six or four. It just happens to show someone's armpit, which is why I feel it's, it's a... Yes, definitely reach. Yes, definitely PR. But as that subsides, where is the long term brand building value of having your logo in someone's armpit?
Jasper Martens 7:52
Yep, I agree. For example, they could have done this before the game starts. Some sort of like exposure ads that says like, you know, we are, we have Rexona. We are prepared to face this game because Rexona, protects you, blah, blah, blah. You could, they could have done that too. I totally agree. But then again, sports bodies are as flexible as hard shoulders. They are not. And sometimes you just have to work with the flexibility that's given. And I guess this was probably, this was one of the clever ways to do it. But in order to alter a game like, you know, in America, in order to alter the game, sometimes there's not a lot of flexibility. I have recently engaged with some other sports bodies for some other opportunities, and it's just no, no, no. And they just turned down quite a nice cash offer, like a sponsorship deal. So sometimes as an advertiser, you are limited. Like they know they've got the numbers, they know they've got the reach. And as an advertiser, sometimes you have to wobble yourself into kind of like a mold of like what is possible. So in that sense, you have to sometimes work with what's given. And I think they've made the best of it.
Tom Ollerton 8:59
Well done Rexona. Fantastic bit of work. And we'll see you all next week.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Listen to our ‘Shiny New Object’ Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube and Soundcloud.