Quiznos vs Subway
Rivalry is part and parcel of competition, and it is also what keeps the competition going. Marketers have often sportingly used advertising to bash the competing brand, as in the cases of Pepsi and Coke, Bud Light and Miller Light.
It is on these lines that Quiznos designed its advertising to break into rival Subway's market share.Starting with its own Subway-bashing commercials, Quiznos invited the public to submit homemade commercials that depict Quiznos sandwiches as being "superior" to Subway's. Subway promptly sued Quiznos for slandering its brand.
At a time when popular contests are generating a lot of publicity for brands like Doritos, KFC, Canon and Dove, Quiznos' contest kills the fun by making the consumers look guilty of mud-slinging. In my opinion, it is not only a misuse of media and creativity, but also highly unethical. Negative publicity may generate a temporary buzz, but it will never generate a positive brand image, which is indispensable for a brand's sustenance.
posted by Wieden+Kennedy/Nike @ 5:51 PM
5 Comments
5 Comments:
I agree that by demanding a certain end from the creative, a great deal of the spontaneity is gone from the "contest." However, aside from buzz, I'm not sure what the company really gets from these contests anyway. Cheap creative that doesn't match the rest of the IMC plan, usually. So I don't find them very appealing as a creative strategy. I certainly wouldn't use the priciest airtime on television to run a vanity advertisement, buzz or no buzz.
While I could be wrong, I really don’t think it was Quizno’s intention to create negative media attention. Instead I think they were merely embracing there number 2 position at the time to use as a marketing push much like Avis did with their “were #2, so we work harder” campaigns. I do agree though, that by using the public to come up with these ads they merely receive content which can’t necessarily be controlled or predicted into their IMC. If their focus is to attack Subway they should use a more a focused and creative approach then contests and media buzz.
Last Semester, while taking the creative strategies course, I was assigned to create a new campaign for Quizno's. For research purposes, I went down to my local Quizno's to have a sandwich, and ended up having a conversation with the restaurant manager. After explaining my assignment, the manager was quick to voice his disgust Quizno's constant advertising attacks on rival Subway. He went on to talk about how he felt it was the wrong way to attract patrons,muttering the phrase "enough is enough" at least three times.
While Quizno's is obviously trying to tear away a portion of the market share from Subway, it seems that they have gone a bit overboard in the past. The media mix for a campaign can only be successful if the tone strikes the right chord with the consumer. In Quizno's case, they have made a wise decision to move away from locking heads with their fiercest rival.
In lieu of all of the Quizno's bashing (even though it is entirely warranted), I would like to highlight some positives to come from the country's No. 2 sandwicheteers --- the Slammies and their subsequent advertising. Quizno's new sandwiches, the Slammies, are cheap (a huge plus for college students) and healthy (er, healthier than some of their other offerings). Rather than bashing their rival, Q's fights fire with fire and shifts focus toward the health-trend craze. This is an example of the right way to battle your archenemy.
Drew's comment here is very enlightening. People don't buy your product because you make fun of their most common choice (a.k.a. Subway). The famous PC/MAC ads only work because they're aimed at MAC users, reinforcing choices, not trying to convert PC users. In this case, I think the store manager is right -- give people a reason to TRY Quiznos.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home