You’ve seen them. The Verizon ads that mock AT&T’s 3G coverage with the cheeky tagline “There’s a Map for that.” So has a federal judge in Atlanta who says AT&T can’t count on the courts to block the competition from pointing out the truth.
In case you’ve missed all the hubbub, Verizon – after months of erroneous speculation the iPhone was finally coming to the V-network – launched a series of ads showing how much 3G coverage Verizon offers compared to AT&T’s puny 3G footprint.
Rather than let the ads run their course, the rocket scientists at AT&T decided the correct course of action was to go to court and claim the ads were misleading. “Look at how big our 2G and EDGE coverage is!” AT&T cried, ignoring the obvious and indisputable facts about their 3G network.
Sensing a nerve had been hit, Verizon made the ads available for sharing online and ordered up a whole new series of attack ads, including the retro “Island of Misfit Toys.” “There’s a Map for That” remains at No. 7 on Visible Measures’ list of top viral ad campaigns.
Within hours of getting booted from the courtroom, AT&T launched it’s own rebuttal ad using actor Luke Wilson. Hopefully AT&T has something better up it’s sleeve because this ad won’t move the needle or, more importantly, make the cash register beep. (They don’t ring any more people. Catch up.)
So, what should we make of all this?
It’s clear that both company’s actions reinforce their brand perceptions. AT&T has flashes of brilliance – the iPhone exclusive agreement – followed by poor execution and indifferent customer service. Verizon, the polar opposite, has generally great strategy and service backed by the occasional bone-headed move. Remember, they passed on the iPhone (Are you kidding me?) because they wanted the handset to be branded Verizon, not Apple.
It remains to be seen, however, if the ads are having a lasting financial impact at either company. And if this smackdown benefits any one other than the lawyers and ad agencies.
Posts
So glad to see you're as sardonic as ever, James!
ReplyDeleteAh yes...AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless are truly the Coke and Pepsi of the telecom category. And while you speak the truth of "bonehead" moves...I'm confident that execs at Verizon Wireless kick themselves to this day that they passed on the iPhone. I'm also confident that AT&T execs are quite aware that their iPhone contract is the primarily thing that keeps them as a viable major player in today's marketplace.
And while Coke blundered with New Coke, and Pepsi lit Michael Jackson's hair on fire...which is said to have been the catalyst for his addiction to prescription pain killers...but I digress...the surprising thing is that it very well may be CONSUMERS that have benefited most from Verizon's ill-fated decision on the iPhone a few years back.
Think about it. If Verizon had signed with iPhone, it would have been "Game Over" for AT&T Mobility, which would have produced a single dominant player in the wireless category. When t here’s a single dominant player in a category, price goes up, because there’s a lack of viable competition.
But happily, that was not the case. The implication of that decision has been:
a) an ongoing commitment to price competition between the two elephants of the industry (benefiting consumers),
b) a seemingly unending development pipeline of new product technology improvements (good for consumers),
c) a single, meaningful benefit each service provider can leverage (and which consumers can clearly understand). Verizon Wireless leverages the strength of its network, which it invested BILLIONS into over several years; AT&T Mobility leverages the iPhone as a product advantage...a strategy that clearly has produced market share gains for them, and
d) Consumers and bloggers are entertained not only by the creative ad campaigns each company's agency produces, but by their occasional legal skirmishes.
What's not to love? ;-)