July 06, 2007
How terribly effective:
Perhaps Bono was grouchy because his celebrity-laden "Red" campaign to promote Western brands to finance begging bowls for Africa has spent $100 million on marketing and generated sales of only $18 million, according to a recent report.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bono's Red:
I saw this report - it was in Advertising Age magazine (registration required, but a copy is here).
It depends what you define as "effective", Tim.
Bono and his mates have basically had $100m spent on plastering their photos and products on billboards and shop fronts all over the planet.
Put it this way: I'd be surprised if his accountant is grouchy.
Posted by: Mr Eugenides | Jul 6, 2007 11:43:21 AM
Sounds like its just as effective as G.Brown's economic strategy...
Posted by: IanP | Jul 6, 2007 12:49:51 PM
Tee-f*cking-hee, well spotted, typical ratio of charity revenue-to-advertising-to-results, then?
Posted by: Mark Wadsworth | Jul 6, 2007 1:28:20 PM
There's plenty of results. They're just not that charitable The partner companies, gap, Motorola etc. have spent $100 million making their brands appeal to 'ethical' consumers. They've also - bonus - raised a few quid for charity. But the success of the campaign will be seen in the overall performance of the brands - because it's just a jumped up marketing wheeze.
Posted by: The Aardvark | Jul 10, 2007 4:08:03 PM