AT&T Online Ad Attacking Verizon Is Misleading, Justifies the “There’s a Map for That” Ads
Scrambling for a response to Verizon’s ad, AT&T did two things: first, it tossed Luke Wilson into a room and had him toss around some postcards that represented AT&T’s network coverage (no mention of 3G coverage—just “network coverage”), and second, it created interactive online advertisements. Good job, AT&T; attack on as many fronts as you can, within your advertising budget. However, I think AT&T’s arguments on why its service is better than Verizon’s are extremely weak and inaccurate.
Starting at the top of this list, we have Nation’s fastest 3G network. Great! Got that out of the way. Take that, Verizon! But, wait, what’s that asterisk? Oh, that would be a disclaimer stating “3G coverage not available in all areas.” This verbiage also appears in TV ads. Isn’t that what Verizon has been discussing in its recent TV ads? This first list item seems to enforce Verizon’s argument.
Second, AT&T has listed Talk and surf or download simultaneously as one of its network perks. This is true. Not much to disagree with here.
The next item on the list, Most popular smartphones, is blown way out of proportion. AT&T definitely has the most popular smartphone in the iPhone, but other than that, the wireless service provider doesn’t have a killer device; Verizon doesn’t really have one, but with the recent release of the Motorola Droid, that’s debatable. Overall, I think this line item should have read Most popular smartphone, singular.
And finally, we have the most misleading, gross misinterpretation of AT&T’s service—Access to over 100,000 apps. It’s well known that the iPhone has tons and tons of apps. However, I think it’s important to note that these 100,000+ apps are only accessible to iPhone users.
Overall, I think this ad is primarily speaking from the point of view of AT&T’s iPhone customers, which still only represents a minority of the company’s subscribers.
Note: I’m an AT&T customer.
Resources: Newsday: Judge rejects AT&T's bid to pull Verizon ads
Labels: advertising, mobile, services, technology, unexplained
4 Comments:
The propaganda from verizon hooked me. Now i will never buy AT&T unless it is for the iPhone... by the way I'm a T-Mobile holder. SideKick LX for the win
@Anonymous It's funny because Verizon hasn't pushed as hard as AT&T. Verizon was the first to attack, but it only lasted for a couple weeks; AT&T's smear campaign has been going on since they responded back to Verizon, which was back in November.
I know a lot of people who've had their iPhones repaired multiple times, only to have to be given a new one. As revolutionary as the iPhone is, the quality of its build is pretty questionable to me.
But who am to say what's good or not? I'm just waiting for Windows Mobile 7 to come out at the end of 2010. :\
I'm a Verizon guy. Coverage is better and their 1-800 customer support is pretty amazing.
That said, here's my idea for an AT+T ad.
Steve Jobs (or the annoying Luke Wilson if you must) says..
"Here's the best reason to get AT+T..... we call it the iphone"
Silence. Look at the phone. Silence. Smile.
Unrefutable argument that Verizon can't beat. Verizon wins any other argument hands down. Sometimes I think AT+T ads do more harm than good.
@Geordie My parents have been with AT&T for I don't know how long. Honestly, for people just looking for cell phone service, I would suggest they go to Verizon. Services and customer service were great when I was with them for a couple years a few years ago.
The only reason I'm with AT&T is because I typically buy my phones unlocked and SIM card holders, which means I pay more but I'm able to customize it to my liking and not have to sign a contract.
I think Verizon's cell phone inventory is beefing up. Just a year ago, their options weren't all that impressive. The upcoming Android phones and other smartphones make Verizon much more attractive to consumers and business folks.
And I agree that AT&T's ads sometimes do more harm than good; they come off as a little too confident. Sure, the network can do that, but at what cost? When it rains, my coverage is lame--and I don't even have an iPhone!
Post a Comment
<< Home