Why Taster’s Choice should fire their ad agency
5 Jul
Driving around the last few weeks I've seen a number of billboards for instant coffee. Starbucks instant coffee. But wait... why do Starbucks' billboards say Taster's Choice? I'm confused. Oh, I see now... they're Taster's Choice billboards talking about Starbucks. And that, in a nutshell, is why Nescafé (Taster's Choice's parent company) should fire their ad agency.
First, a few definitions:
- Starbucks VIA (their capitalization preference, not mine) is the coffee conglomerate's new "ready brew" instant coffee product. Can't speak on it, as they never sent me the free sample I requested. Apparently, Howard Schultz and crew decided to offer a cheaper product for their caffeine-addicted customers to sip while reading their home foreclosure notices.
- Taster's Choice (TC) is the instant coffee brand that's been around forever (check your parent's pantry for a glass jar of the stuff). It apparently—though I've never had it, either—is now sold in single-serving tear-open "sticks" like VIA.
- Advertising is the art of creating a strong desire for your product among your target audience. In this case, that audience is coffee drinkers, a group also known as "just about everybody."
A Taster's Choice billboard. Seriously.
TC and its agency must not understand what advertising is. Take a look at one of their billboards:
Imagine you see this driving down the highway; you have between 2 and 10 seconds to glance at it as you drive. What do you see? Those I've asked reply their first impression is the GIANT word "Starbucks," then "Welcome to the," and lastly a red mug. Boom. That's it. Ask most folks who paid for this thing? Starbucks. What's it advertising, specifically? "Uh, some Starbucks thing... wait, don't they some instant coffee thing now? That must be it."
They followed the first rule of billboard design: keep it simple. Six big words that pop off the background, and a couple images. That's good: in a billboard, all you can do is announce a tagline, leave an impression, reinforce your brand, or tease a memorable website address. That's what they're for, and at that they're pretty effective. As long as the brand impression you leave with viewers is your brand, not that of the competitor entering your market. This is an epic fail on TC's part.
Some might argue that the TC package is visible, as is the Nescafé logo on the mug. Wrong; based on billboard design rules that package is a blip at best, its text essentially invisible. Nescafé is more visible, but with no impact. First, many—if not most—people (myself included) don't associate Nescafé with TC, so there's a disconnect there. The proximity of the word "Starbucks" and the "Nescafé" just muddies the message for those who do recognize these brands: "Oh, is Starbucks serving Nescafé stuff now?" At best, it's a muddied message; at worst, it's free advertising for Starbucks.
TC made a few poor choices with this campaign. First, why mention Starbucks at all? Calling them out by name in any manner shows they're on the defensive. Perhaps they should be; Starbucks is the coffee behemoth after all, and they may do well in this instant-coffee niche. Such advertising, even if done well (and this campaign wasn't), can backfire.
Second, if they wanted to challenge Starbucks' entry into their marketplace, why did they copy their competitor's branding? It's downright dumb to think that by looking like Starbucks' campaign, they somehow have a greater ability to differentiate their product in the minds of their audience. No; it has the opposite effect. Look at Starbucks' billboard (left), posted during the same timeframe as TC's (right).
 Starbuck's billboard for a general branding campaign |
 Another billboard in the campaign; same poor branding issue. |
You would be forgiven if you confused the TC campaign for Starbucks'. Same all-capped font, same canvas-colored background, same earth-toned fonts. It's clearly an attempt to imitate the aesthetic.
Only time will tell whether Starbucks VIA overtakes the instant-coffee market. But TC's campaign certainly is helping them do it.
Update: turns out I'm not the only one who's noticed this.
Related posts:
- Inescapable advertising Ads are nothing new, from Burma Shave billboards to American...
- Coffee on the Ave — (4) Starbucks I’m touring and reviewing the coffeeshops on “the Ave.”...
- The best marketing ever comes from somewhere you wouldn’t expect First, check out this new smartphone. Makes the iPhone...
I agree with you here–Nescafe’s ad agency needs to rethink this campaign. Here is what I see when I first glance at this billboard:
1) Welcome to the Starbucks
2) Instant neighborhood
3) The Nescafe mug
Item 1) automatically makes me think this is a Starbucks ad, suggesting there’s a new store opening nearby. Great, another place to get a frappuccino.
Number 2) brings thoughts of instant coffee, which since I’ve tried VIA, conjures up my pleasant memories of it.
After the first two items, number 3) is the most confusing. At least for me, here in the US the Nescafe brand elicits images chocolate (Nesquick, Nestle Toll House cookies, etc.) Why would a Starbucks ad pair with a mug of hot chocolate? Must be a new type of mocha.
The billboard is at best confusing to consumers. At the worst it makes you want to visit your competitor’s store and try their latest coffee drink made with Nescafe chocolate syrup. Neither will help promote your own line of mini instant coffee packs.
Here’s what always gets me about crappy marketing campaigns: someone at some point is sitting around the conference table after the presentation thinking, “this is a great idea!”
One look at it and I wanted a Dr. Pepper. They seem ok in my book! ;)
Wow! I don’t understand why in the world Taster’s Choice & Nestle would want to put the word “Starbucks” anywhere in their ads. Not only that, but why make your competitors logo so much bigger than yours? These billboard ads are very confusing and can’t possibly be effective for Tasters Choice. On the other hand, Starbucks is probably seeing some benefits of this free advertising since at a quick glance (and that’s all the attention most billboard get) it looks like a Starbucks ad.
In my opinion these Taster’s Choice billboards would be much more effective if they were designed to focus on their own benefits and not even mention their competition. Just let the consumers “read between the lines.”
If the client absolutely had to have Starbucks on their ads to compare (which I would not recommend for legal and moral issues) then make it an obvious comparison by dividing the sign into 1/2 & putting a cup of each coffee & their price on their half that way the consumer could see how much cheaper TC is. I would probably take it one step further and put a dark shadow box over Starbucks side & make the TC side glow or stand out more. Then add a tagline about TC costing 4 times less & being just as flavorfull.
There are many other options that would work for Taster’s Choice too but this ad is not going to work for the paying client.
I agree the advertising is stupid. That being said, I have 2 boxes of Taster’s Choice insta-coffee at my desk. Perhaps they should hire Scott Bush as their ad agency.