Well, if it's shock value that you are after here, it definitely works! haha. The hot girl is definitely hot, but the foot is so jacked up, I'm wondering what the consumer reaction might be? I think that if the foot carnage was turned down a bit, and the text (and type-face) was looked at this could be even more effective. :)
6 months ago
Yeah, he wants shock value. He said he's played it safe and spent so much money on advertising just for no one to know who he is.
ew... not a fan.. I would instead do a little research as to why he is not getting noticed instead of just going for some weird "shock value" thing. I mean, that still doesn't tell anyone who he is. The logo is bare discernible and it is actually competing with ANOTHER logo which is of equal size. Is homebodies the brand? Foot Connect? Which?
Either way, I think it's more important to do an audit and overhaul of his brand instead of just going for the "cheap shot" with some scary looking foot that is just going to upset people.
Thanks for the feedback Lindsay.
The two logo thing is kinda troubling. Should probably resolve that.
As for the concept, it's a multi-step campaign. First is to get his logo(s) remembered and to educate people on the fact that footcare isn't just for old people or people with unhealthy feet but everyone should have an annual checkup. This grabs attention and communicates that message.
Here's the issue though - it's actually NOT multi-step. Your ad is doing one thing - making people go EW GROSS and turn the page (or click off). They may talk about the ad to a friend in that they might some "OMG I saw this nasty ad where it had a hot girl with a gross decrepit foot" but they will not remember the actual ad nor what it was for nor the actual company it was for because in trying to be "shocking" you have forgotten about branding.
If he wants to reach young people, my opinion is that this is not the way. What about the ad speaks to young people? What about the ad tells young people that foot care is important? What about the ad tells someone what to do next (call to action)?
Well it apparently grosses you out and that's okay. No one ad is going to work for everybody but I've got a lot of positive feedback already. Who knows, maybe it's a Canadian thing. Have you seen our work safety ads?! It does have a call to action, it asks the target reader, someone who wouldn't normally get a foot checkup, to book their initial assessment.
Here's the thing - I work in marketing. I know pretty well how people react and what types of things connect to different people across the globe, but most specifically the US and Canada (as I have done work with both)
Your ad is missing a mark which is to gain brand recognition and it's missing the target which is to speak to young people about foot care.
My point regarding the call to action is that the actual design of the ad doesn't have one. Yes, you actually spell out the call to action by saying "make an appointment" or whatever, but there isn't a single element of that design that does that and that call to action isn't specific to your defined target (young people) it's just a general statement.
You may have gotten positive feedback, but I am giving you honest feedback.
p.s. I just looked up those ads you spoke of and this is so very different. Those ads are not shock value for the sake of shock value. Those ads directly and independently target specific groups of people with each one and give them a very clear reason for the gruesome violence and do it with meaning. For one, they are doing it simply to get people talking about the ad. So their purpose is to get people to say "OMG did you see the work safety ad" and not to learn, recognize, and memorize a brand. These types of ads would not be successful is that was their goal, but it's not so it works.
My point still stands. You should really spend time looking at the reason why his branding is not creating turn over instead of throwing stuff at the wall waiting for it to stick.
Thanks for your honest feedback Lindsay. I hope you aren't inferring that my positive feedback was dishonest feedback. ;) I'm glad to talk to a fellow marketer. Just a little background, I have an Honours Bachelor of Commerce degree, marketing major, from 2009.
My hope is also to get people talking about the ad as in "OMG, did you see the footcare ad with that chick with the gross foot?" and get them talking about it much like the work safety ads.
I maybe should have explained the situation better. Here in Thunder Bay, a town of about 110K, there is very little competition for this client. His main problem is that people don't believe footcare is important. They see it as a last resort or just for the elderly, and he needs people to see it as more like a visit to the dentist. So the first thing we must do is re-educate the public that regular foot check-ups is something we should all do. His brand, in this ad, is not as important as changing attitudes and beliefs. The goals of this ad are first to draw eyeballs by showing a beautiful woman who's obviously taken care of herself but she has foot ailments of a diabetic's foot. She's young, she's healthy for the most part but she's neglected her rotting foot.
If we push his brand and just tell people why he's so great then we're putting the cart before the horse. There's no sense in telling people "Eat at Joe's" if people don't think eating is important.
I am just going to say again, even with hue feedback, I wouldn't do it this way. I still strongly believe that your artwork is not conveying the message that you say you need to (that foot are is important for your people).
Maybe someone else will jump in here so it's not just me.
keyboard shortcuts: ← previous shot → next shot L or F like
Show and tell for designers
What are you working on? Dribbble is a community of designers sharing screenshots of their work, process, and projects.
Copyright © 2009–2013 Dribbble LLC. All screenshots © their respective owners. Shipped from Salem, Mass. USA.
Follow Dribbble on Twitter