Hasta La Creative!

A gente já sabe que a tendência atual é da troca da comunicação broadcast para meios mais privados, em aplicativos de mensagens como WhatsApp ou o Snapchat. O que talvez não tenhamos antecipado é a chegada de um sistema de notificações de pessoas interessadas em falar com você, mas sem a menor paciência para (ou ideia do que) escrever.

Com ao objetivo de criar um aplicativo de comunicação veloz e com o menor números de toques na tela necessários, foi criado o “Yo”, app que virou sucesso, alcançando mais de 1 milhão de usuários e chamando a atenção de investidores, que estavam dispostos a investir mais de 1,2 milhões de dólares na iniciativa.

A ideia é tão simples e meio ‘sem objetivo’ que os desenvolvedores precisaram insistir e justificar a viabilidade do app para que  a Apple aprovasse a entrada do “Yo” na App Store – com design bem minimalista, ele permite selecionar um amigo dentro de uma lista e enviar um ‘yo’.

Apenas isso. Nada mais. Sem janelas de chat, emoticons, emojis, troca de imagens, vídeos ou o escambau. Apenas ‘yo’, que poderia ser traduzido em português como ‘e aí’, ‘ow’, ‘sussa?’, ‘eae’ ou qualquer interjeição dessas que se usa para começar uma conversa.

O sucesso do app deixou investidores bastante interessados, mas Moshe Hogeg, idealizador do “Yo”, e Or Arbel, o desenvolvedor do app, são pragmáticos e fazem questão de manter os pés no chão: “A quantidade de investimentos que querem fazer na empresa é inacreditável. Investidores querem dar ao Yo uma valorização absurda, mas não achamos que ele mereça tudo isso, ao menos não nesse primeiro momento. Se o app continuar a crescer nesse ritmo pelos próximos meses, talvez, mas não acho que vamos seguir desse jeito”, explica Hogeg em entrevista ao BusinessInsider.

Os interessados em testar a novidade e mandar um “yo” para os amigos podem fazer download do app na App Store ou na Google Play.

Não sei vocês, mas para mim pareceu um app especialmente focado em dar ‘poke’ nas pessoas. Se a cutucadinha do Facebook não deu certo, por que mesmo que precisaríamos de um app dedicado a isso? Em todo caso, criei minha conta, e vamos ver no que dá.

Post originalmente publicado no Brainstorm #9
Twitter | Facebook | Contato | Anuncie

CANNES, France—All this past week, Cannes Lions judges and presenters talked endlessly about how the best ads are those that inspire and even improve the world.

So, why was the festival’s most awarded campaign an unapologetic (if tongue-in-cheek) homage to selfishness and greed? One whose centerpiece video has a relatively meager 500,000 views on YouTube—and was, in fact, the only ad jeered by attendees at Saturday’s award show here?

The Harvey Nichols holiday campaign “Sorry, I Spent It on Myself” from agency adam&eveDDB took home no less than four Grand Prix, making it the second most awarded campaign in the festival’s history. (McCann Melbourne set the record last year with five Grand Prix for “Dumb Ways to Die.”)

The campaign centered on the creation of cheap products, such as gravel or rubber bands, sold in Harvey Nichols stores with the label “Sorry, I Spent It on Myself.” The video showed customers giving these crap gifts to relatives and loved ones at Christmas while enjoying expensive clothing and handbags for themselves.

It’s a good campaign, and may well have deserved the Integrated Grand Prix. It also won the Press Grand Prix, the Promo & Activation Grand Prix and a Film Grand Prix—one of two awarded in that category, along with Volvo Trucks’ “Epic Split.” And it’s that Grand Prix in Film—where it bested some truly powerful and popular pieces of cinematography—that’s the real head-scratcher.

At a press conference Saturday afternoon, the Film Lions judges gushed about the spot’s “boldness” but struggled to explain how it merited such lofty accolades. I asked them how it could possibly have been a unanimous selection as one of the two best pieces of advertising film in the past year.

“To take greed and make people laugh and smile about it is, I think, incredibly difficult,” said jury member Pete Favat, chief creative officer  of Deutsch L.A. “And as a film, it’s a perfect piece of film.”

I disagree, and it was clear I wasn’t alone when, during a screening of the ad at Saturday’s big award ceremony, some derisive whistling could be heard.

To illustrate why its Grand Prix selection was so baffling, we’ve decided to highlight some of the work it beat for the top spot. You might not agree that any one of them was Grand Prix material, but you’d be hard pressed to argue that they’re lesser films. 

Below are our picks for seven ads that could have, and should have, ranked higher than Harvey Nichols:

 
• Lacoste: “The Big Leap” by BETC Paris

Somehow this stellar piece of cinematography only won a silver Lion in Film. French journalists told me they felt the video was largely snubbed at Cannes, where it was shortlisted in Film Craft but awarded no Lion in that category.

 
• Wren: “First Kiss” by Durable Goods L.A.

While this viral juggernaut with nearly 85 million views has its share of critics, it’s hard to deny it was one of the most compelling, talked-about and just plain interesting videos of the year. Judges clearly liked it quite a bit, awarding it bronze and gold Lions in Film and a bronze in Film Craft.

 
• Coca-Cola: “Parents” by Santo Buenos Aires

Surprising, funny, perfectly crafted. It’s just so damn good. Judges liked it enough to give it a gold Lion in Film.

 
• Guinness: “Sapeurs” by AMV BBDO

A real story, told really well. This piece starring a super-stylish group of Congolese gentlemen won a silver Lion in Film and a bronze Lion in Film Craft. 

 
• Lurpak: “Adventure Awaits” by Wieden + Kennedy London

Anyone who’s ever made a food ad (or, hell, watched a food ad) will realize what a masterpiece of innovative visuals this is. It won gold in Film Craft.

 
• Skype: “The Born Friends Family Portrait” by Pereira & O’Dell

It’ll make you smile. It’ll make you cry. It’s a touching piece of documentary that’s as stylish as it is emotional. But oddly, it didn’t win any Lions in Film. (It did win two silver Lions and two bronze Lions in Cyber and a bronze in Branded Content & Entertainment.) Read the story behind the story in our interview with creator PJ Pereira.

 
• Volvo Trucks: “The Epic Split” by Forsman & Bodenfors

The other Grand Prix winner in Film, and deservedly so. Let’s revisit it to remind ourselves how different these supposedly equal spots are.

 
What do you think? Did the Film judges overreach, or was the Harvey Nichols spot really that good? And what would you have selected?

It’s nearly ten years since Crispin, Porter & Bogusky reached the creative high of being judged as Agency of the Year in 2004 and in 2008,

as well as Agency of the Decade.

What is the reach when advertising across multiple digital screens? How do you calculate digital reach and brand impact from moving TV dollars to digital video? These are common questions from clients and agencies; and while there are tools out there to calculate the reach of TV advertising, there have been none to date measuring the reach of multi-screen video advertising. Because of this, we embarked on a research study with Nielsen to find the impact of reach when mixing TV and digital video, and to measure the brand metrics across these multi-screen mixes. What we came up with is the industry’s first multi-screen Reach Calculator that computes unduplicated reach across TV, online, smartphone, tablet, and connected TV.

Through surveys and a live media lab, we collected a data base of device ownership and multi-screen usage, and powered with Nielsen models, created the YuMe Reach Calculator. Media planners can use this tool to estimate incremental reach across all screens when shifting a small percentage of their TV budgets to different screens. For example, with a $5M budget, by simply shifting 10% of your TV budget to an allocation of 3% online, 3% mobile, 2% tablet and 2% OTT, your advertising campaign’s reach increases by 27%. By extending their digital video campaign mix, TV brand advertisers can gain new audiences simply by finding them on different devices.

Extended reach is great, but what about my brand metrics? With the average US household owning 4.4 devices and 87% of consumers using a connected device while watching TV, it’s no wonder that TV advertisers are having a hard time getting through to these technology-fragmented and distracted audiences. In the second portion of our study, we measured the impact of multi-screen exposure on brand metrics. The research has shown that the biggest incremental gains in brand recall, consideration and recommendation is through three or more screen exposure. We found that exposure on all four screens resulted in an impressive 50% uplift in brand impact! The more screens, the more triggers for ad and brand recall. So not only does shifting more increase your ad reach, but shifting to multiple screens has also shown to improve your brand results. So start getting your shift together!

Continue reading at AdAge.com

A primeira Copa do Mundo foi realizada em 1930, no Uruguai, onde o país anfitrião venceu o campeonato no Estádio Centenário. No próximo dia 13 de julho, será a vez do Maracanã ser o palco de mais uma final, ainda sem os protagonistas definidos.

Enquanto aguardamos para saber quem vai levar o título este ano, vale dar uma olhada no infográfico criado pela Grassform, traçando a história visual dos estádios que receberam finais de Copas do Mundo nos últimos 84 anos.

O projeto traz os locais, anos em que foram construídos, capacidade de público e o vencedor daquele ano. Simples e informativo. 

Post originalmente publicado no Brainstorm #9
Twitter | Facebook | Contato | Anuncie