Back in 1999, there was - according to all rumors - quite the dramatic pitch for the überhot account of Adidas. W+K Amsterdam was involved, and from the ashes of that pitch was born a brand new agency: 180. Would they show off good once they showed some work? Yes, they would. This Adidas ad blew most people away back then, and was ripped off a few times (some Dutch bank copy was in an early Badlander here). I personally applauded it for being my go-to whenever I needed to show a client that YES you do not to speak the VO when it's written on the screen already, gosh darnit.
Take the championship
Take the world cup
Take the first place
Take the last place
Take control of the stadium
Take control of the streets
Take it seriously
..etc and so on, just watch it, please
More than ten years later, from an agency on another continent....
Take the stage
Take the water
Take the track
...and the field
Take the fan-mail
Take the online marriage proposals
Take the tabloid hysteria
Take the upset
Take the win against their own game
..and so on, OMG I am so not typing all that out gais, srsly, just listen to it aight?
Seeing the same client approve (demand?) such similar executions so many years apart makes me think that the client might be the one steering the creative a bit too much here, in a "lets do what we once did before that totally worked" kind of thing. It's either time for a new agency or new ad buyers. Guess where my bet lies.
Adland® is a commercial-laden heaven and hell for advertising addicts around the world.
This advertising publication was founded in 1996, built on beer and bravery, Adland® now boasts the largest super bowl commercials collection in the world.
Adland® survives on your donations alone. You can help us out by buying us a Ko-Fi. Adland® works best in Brave browser
I have to disagree with your point there, why not use the same concept again, even if it is a decade later if it worked the first time?
Why not keep the same feel? it worked once before. Not every campaign has to be a totally new idea.. there isn't anything wrong with consistency..
- reply
PermalinkIf it were the same agency i would buy that. maybe. except a. it's not the same campaign. one was done as a brand spot, representing all sports. the second was done for the olympics. while you may argue not every campaign has to be a totally new idea (although i don't believe this) remember, this work was done by two different agencies. so it either feels incredibly lazy on the second agencies' part, or it seems like the client is dictating the creative. and if that's the case, why did they hire an agency?
- reply
PermalinkLets go with Zaina's "why not" for a moment here, why not use the same concept again? If so, should the original agency be compensated for the concept's re-use? If not, why not? Are concepts not IP the agency creates? If not why not? Should they be, seeing as one concept can run for 30 years in various executions, and in theory can keep running whilst various agencies have the account. Should the concept part of the ad agency service be priced for possible future use by other agencies half-way across the world, and sold to the client that way? Am I asking a lot of questions?
- reply
PermalinkIs this more manifesto-y than the example where Douwe Egderts copied that ADidas ads style? Either way, they belong in the Manifesto ads corner.
- reply
Permalink