Generally speaking, comparative advertising is used to present a product or service as being superior to a comparable product or service from a competitor. The main goal of the business running the ad is to communicate the value of their brand relative to the attributes of one or more other brands. Here, value may take the form of product size, range, quality, volume, or price.
- Apple once advertised its Mac PCs by running different comparative TV advertisements that embodied the Mac and the PC in amusingly various manners—the Mac being laid-back and fashionable and the PC being unfashionable and conventional.
- These categories are called basic because they tend to be used most frequently to categorize both natural and social objects.
- Comparative advertising is a marketing tactic which helps to drive brand awareness by comparing their product or service to a competitor.
- Alternatively, going after an anonymous combination of competitors allows you to retain a good reputation while still communicating your value as a business in a memorable way.
- Comparative advertising is a bold way of pitting competing brands against each other, and it can certainly be an effective way to fetch attention.
With an appropriate comparative ad, you can showcase the flaws of your competitor’s product and highlight how your product outperforms theirs. Comparative advertising lets you tell potential customers about what makes your product unique in a direct, straightforward way. By comparing a competitor’s product with yours side-by-side, you can highlight the specific, factual reasons why your product is better, which strengthens its product image.
Examples Of Comparative Advertising + Marketing Lessons
According to the FTC, explicitness is a function of naming your competitors and specifically identifying the attributes on which the brands are compared. For example, a comparative claim may assert that the sponsored brand is “better than the leading brand” (Jackson, et al. 1979). Jackson, et al. (1979) reported that the use of these implicit comparative claims far exceeds that of the more traditional explicit comparisons which names or showed two or more competing brands.
Although the data are only partially analyzed as yet, there seems to be enough evidence to suggest that comparative advertising can be effective for the challenger. The results cast doubt on the conclusions and methodologies employed in previous research which suggested that comparative advertising has little positive impact. When you empower your marketing team — in addition to the rest of your organization — with CI, you enable them to more effectively position your product or service.
Counterarguing can explain the results of studies where comparative advertising is less effective than noncomparative advertising. Other factors may explain the majority of the research which has shown comparative and noncomparative advertising to be equally effective. Previous research has often utilized fictitious brands making explicit comparisons to a brand leader (Prasad 1976).
Chick-fil-A chooses to keep the outlets closed on a Sunday while Popeyes takes advantage of the situation and keeps the outlet open throughout the week. The brand advertises this to remind the public that they are open on Sundays by directly comparing themselves with Chick-fil-A. We are an independent partner who knows the competitive landscape of marketing and providers. Tell us your needs and we’ll let you know which marketing provider you need to meet. But, while going after the little guy might help you win in the short term, it’s not a good long-term strategy. Also, they usually have deep pockets to deal with any legal issues that might arise.
Examples Of Comparative Advertising
Now that you’ve learned the best practices for comparative advertising, it’s finally time to check out a few of the most famous, real-life comparative ad examples you can take inspiration from. If telling a joke or mocking your competitor in a healthy manner does not align with your brand’s image, then you can always go for a different approach where you compare your product with a competitor’s on a factual basis. In order to yield the maximum results possible, you need to be creative with your comparative advertisements. However, it is critical to understand and abide by laws and regulations of the comparative advertising method to avoid getting sued by your competitors. Comparative advertising has proven to attract the attention of a big audience more quickly than other marketing methods.
The long answer, however, involves some specific guidelines about just how you compare yourself to the competition. What you say about you, what you say about them, and where you say it, all affect whether your rival can sue you. This is the only case we have found, however, where the plaintiff demonstrated falsity by discrediting the data.
What Is Comparative Advertising? Comparative Advertising In A Nutshell
According to Sujan and Dekleva (1987), only a few inferences can be drawn at this level. These categories are called basic because they tend to be used most frequently to categorize both natural and social objects. Basic level categories have a greater number of shared attributes than at the superordinate level, as well as attributes that distinguish one basic level category from another. Categorization at this level also allows many more inferences to be drawn which tend to be more evaluative in nature (Sujan and Dekleva 1987).
So, before writing your comparative advertising campaign, be always ready to back up your claims. It’s also crucial to make sure you have accurate and up-to-date information about the product you’re comparing yours to. Once you’ve got your facts straight, write your ad from a place of fact and reason, not emotion.
Wendy’s vs McDonald’s
Comparative Advertising is an advertising procedure that promotes your gods or services by comparing it with your competitor’s goods or services. The objective of this form of advertising is to show why you will be a better option compared to your rival. While comparative advertising is most frequently seen in product or service promotion, it has also formed part of political advertisements. In this case, a candidate standing for election may describe how they’ll avoid making the same mistakes as the incumbent.
In the above example, everything ended well and no one got into any trouble. But there are situations where brands face the wrath of disappointed fans who don’t like it when their favorite brands are criticized. That’s one thing to keep in mind when you come up with a comparative ad. While the response itself is a good example of the difference copy can make in advertising, the whole incident is an example of what happens when you mess with brands with a huge fan following.
Always Trust in Your Friends? Cross-cultural Effects of Review Source and Incentives on Trustworthiness
The above propositions suggest to what extent category schemata versus advertisement information direct or control the inferences used to frame processing and evaluations. Basically, the level of the comparison object serves as a trigger to activate the corresponding schema in memory. If this schema has been acquired by the consumer, the activated schema will serve as a basis for generating inferences that frame evaluations. Although we did not offer predictions here, the specific nature of inferences generated will likely depend on the particular level of category schema that is activated (see Sujan and Dekleva-1987). If the schema is unavailable in memory, the inferences used to frame processing will be closely related to the information available in the advertisement.
For example, ads may use comparative adjectives without mentioning a competitor (“highest quality”), compare their brand to “other brands,” or make a comparison visually without an explicit mention of it in the copy. In addition, ads often compare the sponsored brand to objects other than a competing brand (i.e. the product class in general, noncomparable product classes). Three products (toothpaste, low tar cigarettes, and golf balls) were chosen for which a variety of comparative and non-comparative magazine ads were available for selection.
Following exposure to the ads in all three product categories, subjects were then asked to indicate the thoughts they had while looking at the at(s) in the last product category seen by then. The cognitive response data are still to be coded and the data other than the attitude question described in the previous paragraph have not yet been fully analyzed. The present study was designed to test this notion and its implications for how consumers respond to both the two brands in question and to other brands in this product category and in other product categories.
When it comes to comparative advertising, adding humor can have significant advantages. For starters, telling a joke or two can save your brand from being seen as a bully. Furthermore, adding humor can make comparative advertising seem like a playful banter between two brands. On top of attracting new customers, comparative advertising is a great way to strengthen your existing customer base. By seeing your comparative ad, they can feel validated about their shopping choices, which can ultimately encourage them to continue buying your product in the future as well.
The central element of the challenger’s comparative ad was a favorable comparison of itself with the leader on a particular attribute. Furthermore, the preference measure was presumably made more sensitive than preference measures of previous studies by asking for a comparative, comparative advertising example rather than a separate, evaluation of the challenger and leader. Each subject was randomly assigned to a particular condition for all three products. Thus, for example, subjects in Condition 1 were exposed to a challenger’s non-comparative at for all three products.
BMW social team made it light-hearted and fun-full while still advocating that BMW is better. As per stats, around 55% of buyers like remembering funny ads, and such tweets for sure appreciate the long-lasting impacts. At one of the Halloween times, BMW got a massive number of re-tweets and likes when they made jokes about their competitor Mercedes-Benz. Their tweet included a picture of a Mercedes-Benz sports car wearing a BMW costume.
Counterarguing or a discounting of claims should be expected if consumers suspect that the motivation to present more facts is not for the consumer’s benefit. Similarly, one sided formats would be expected to create greater counterarguing than two sided advertisements because the latter may appear to be more honest. Another highly-referenced comparative advertising campaign is between competitors Coca-Cola and Pepsi, in which advertisements will directly compare the tastes or benefits of one over the other. For example, the now-famous Pepsi Challenge is a recurring commercial that has been aired since 1975.