|
The Packers won, the Steelers lost, and Christina Aguilera dropped
the ball. If the singer's red-faced rendition of the Star Spangled Banner left
you wondering who booked her botched appearance, just be glad you didn't have
to pay the tab for those high-priced Super Bowl commercials. Television advertisers
spent as much as $3 million (USD) for a 30-second slot, or some $100,000 per
second.
So why would American companies spend so much non-government
bailout money so freely? The answer is simple: how else can you reach
100 million TV viewers? As the Packers and Steelers took television timeouts, consumers
watched ads with dogs and Darth Vader. Those in search of "TV commercials worth
watching" were also treated to advertisements from Verizon Wireless, AT&T,
and Motorola.
While Verizon and AT&T slugged it out at the line of
scrimmage over which team has the best iPhone/network combination, Motorola scored
a touchdown with a television advertisement of its own. Motorola's deep threat,
an ad reminiscent of Apple's "1984" television commercial, was at least memorable.
AT&T, however, is hoping you'll forget what one halftime performer tweeted,
after telling fans of the Black Eyed Peas that he'd use Twitter. "At&t??? Wow . . . no service
during halftime . . . unbelievable".
Sources: Wireless
Week and USA
Today
| 
Re: The Wireless Super Bowl
