Thought it worth checking back on how Ray-Ban's "Bobbing for Glasses," was doing now that it's been up for about two weeks. (It's a follow-up, of course, to "Catch" the video where the guy appears to catch glasses with his face, which currently has 2.7 million views on YouTube alone.) But the big difference with this video, in terms of distribution, is that the agency, Cutwater, and client decided—to me inexplicably—to not seed it as aggressively as they did with the first one. (Hey, it's the client's money, but this is supposed to be advertising, not social experimentation.) Still, the video is doing respectably. As of this morning it has 142,000 views on YouTube. True, nowhere near its predecessor, which has been up for a few months, but not measly either. While the folks at Cutwater and Ray-Ban analyze what the drivers were of this particular video, one thing we may never know is how much of what will probably be a traffic drop compared to the other is attributable to what might be called Sequel Syndrome, in which the second of anything is never nearly as noteworthy as the first.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Ray-Ban's "Bobbing" somewhat respectable
Thought it worth checking back on how Ray-Ban's "Bobbing for Glasses," was doing now that it's been up for about two weeks. (It's a follow-up, of course, to "Catch" the video where the guy appears to catch glasses with his face, which currently has 2.7 million views on YouTube alone.) But the big difference with this video, in terms of distribution, is that the agency, Cutwater, and client decided—to me inexplicably—to not seed it as aggressively as they did with the first one. (Hey, it's the client's money, but this is supposed to be advertising, not social experimentation.) Still, the video is doing respectably. As of this morning it has 142,000 views on YouTube. True, nowhere near its predecessor, which has been up for a few months, but not measly either. While the folks at Cutwater and Ray-Ban analyze what the drivers were of this particular video, one thing we may never know is how much of what will probably be a traffic drop compared to the other is attributable to what might be called Sequel Syndrome, in which the second of anything is never nearly as noteworthy as the first.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Not sure it's that complicated Catherine.
My non-ad friends are all fascinated by "Catch" because of the "how did they do that" factor - that's what's contributed to the incredible # of page views.
Bad news (possibly) for Ray Ban is that they all refer to it as "the video where the guy catches the sunglasses" not "the video where the guy catches the Ray Bans"
(I'm often asked "how did they do that" since, working in advertising, I clearly know how every single piece of advertising was done and what the meaning behind it is ;) Take Ray Ban's quizzical "Never Hide" print campaign, for instance.)
Post a Comment