It was very interesting to read Dragana Milisic’s blog about the “Oreo’s surprising slam-dunk advertisement.” This type of unconventional and out of the blue advertisement really helped Oreo to stand out among other Superbowl ads. The unpredictability and the surprise element of such ads make people smile and admire the company’s brilliant marketing methods.

It’s worth mentioning that although these type of creative advertisements do not cost very much in comparison to million dollar Superbowl ads, they are very risky. This type  of “right on the spot creating” has caused numerous crucial problems for companies in the past. Certainly that is why not many brands have the stomach for such a risky advertisements.

This type of risky marketing method begs the question that why some companies can use such methods and some do not? Let me explain this by an example.

Oreo has been around for a very long time and customer’s know this brand by their delicious product and not by their advertising campaigns. Thus even if their risky ads become controversial, not many customers will stop eating their delicious, now 100 years old sandwich cooky. On the other hand the upside of such advertisements are significant. People like to be surprised and this type of creative thinking excites many potential customers.

So overall, the big question is: Would this type of unanticipated advertising change the marketing world for good? The answer is: It really depends. This type of advertising is useful for established companies who can also handle the downside when their risky ads turn out to be controversial. For new companies and products, this method is very risky. This type of publicity have destroyed many emerging companies in the past.