Two Campaigns, One Theme, Different Outcomes
In the world of Advertising you’re constantly running up against another campaign that covers the same subject matter. Messaging is key when it comes to separating yourself from the competition. The two following ads will probably not be seen in the same demographic because they are from different states. However, one is clearly a winner and keeps it simple while the other doesn’t.
Campaign 1 – Utah
This campaign hinges on small copy, meaningful phrases and repetition with the same backgrounds: either leather or pavement. The pavement and leather is very high contrast with a worn and rugged look. This is meant to tie into the biker demographic. The colors of white/black/yellow/orange are very high contrast bringing the messaging forward. The leather background with orange stitching ties into Harley Divisions brand equity to make another meaningful tie to the biker demographic.
Advertising Agency: Richter7, Salt Lake City, USA
Executive Creative Director: Dave Newbold
Creative Directors: Gary Sume, Ryan Anderson
Art Director: Ryan Anderson
Copywriter: Gary Sume
Published: May 2010
Campaign 2 – Colorado
This campaign has slightly longer copy and a bright / stark color palette combo. Where the bikers are shown in black & white and in “serious” poses. The difference between the colors on the left make them “stand out”. All the ads keep in the same style to make a cohesive group.
Advertising Agency: Amélie Company, Denver, Colorado, USA
Creative Director: Paul Suggett
Art Director: Gordy Hirsch
Copywriter: Paul Suggett
Photographer: Dan Sidor
Designer: Garrett DeHeer
Published: June 2010
Campaign Theme – Motorcycle Safety
Motorcycle safety is a serious concern. There are many accidents caused by other drivers who disregard the safety of bikers on the road. Being on a bike exudes freedom but, it also comes with a price. You’re the smallest vehicle on the road and if you wreck it hurts. (theres no bumpers here) These two campaigns from Colorado & Utah are compared on their messaging and overall ad messaging. Which one do you think is the best?
Chad Engle is the Editor of Fuel Your Creativity. He is a freelance designer & creative. He listens to some music and tweets. He is now hailing from the Charleston, SC area. You should follow him on twitter at @chadengle and @fuelcreativity . Don’t be afraid, he doesn’t bite.
Grab the Feed
I like the ones with the street background the most. Big typography so the signs are easily readable. The message is not insulting other drivers. Clean, simple and powerful messages using only a few colors for strong visual impact.
The second one is hard to read, especially from a distance. Message is OK.
I don’t like the third one. First of all I am a biker myself and I don’t feel related to the pictures at all. They all show kinda badass bikers with long beards and angry faces, the once you don’t want to meet after dark. I don’t think that is the image you want to put up for bikers. But maybe that’s just me and maybe all the bikers there are so badass. The other overall feel is more a Starbucks feel to advertise a new sort of coffee or something.
I agree with almost everything you said. The top ones of concrete and leather in my opinion really speak to the biker culture a lot more. I’m not a fan of the colors in the second, and while I don’t agree with your opinion on the badass bikers, I can see what you mean. Although, in my opinion when people think of bikers, they think more of people like them. Also I like the fact that they look badass, but they are however talking about safety.
Overall though, I think the top campaign has a lot more impact and resonance with the biker community, and even with the non community. People who are not part of the biker community will still identify the top ones to be about bikers.
I think the first campaign is a clear winner. Better contrast and color palette that helps to get the message across, and the messaging concept is better than the second because its not as wordy, … In my opinion as a biker and designer.
nice… i like it!
Where the “Different outcomes” ? I expected a comparative analysis of target responses to the two campaigns, but nothing of the sort here…
Very disappointed to say the least!
The outcomes are in the reply’s. You may be disappointed, but think about it, a worthy comparison that asks for analytical observation. What is your opinion?
I ride, I agree!! Nice work…thank you
Indeed, which was the better campaign????
I believe the first one had more impact.
The first one is a better choice because the overall campaign is more direct, easy to read and put up a better overall view of the bikers culture. I find the second campaign rather stereotyped in a manner that doesn’t show a positive image of the bikers and also longer to read. This second disadvantage is crucial because a print campaign should be read and understood instantly by most people to be efficient.
But great job on both visuals!
The first one. It’s easier to read and fits the culture better. It also focuses on benefits for the biker (in an amusing way).
The second one scolds them.
I like Campaign 1. Simple reason is it gives message to a novice user (who doesn’t know about design) in like few milliseconds. In campaign 2 : User will scan all the unnecessary details. First I looked at Biker and then the message, which is not what we want. I think Campaign 1 should do better (it’s just my hunch).
I’m actually gonna go for the second one. Why? Because the posters are aimed at both car drivers, and bikers. Car drivers realize what dangerous things they are doing (like putting ketchup on fries while driving), also it makes bikers realize about what car drivers are doing.
A biker would feel less insulted, yet with a slogan like Road Rash Is Preventable, you get the feeling it’s the biker’s fault.
Both would lead to change, namely bikers and car drivers will be more aware, but with the second campaign design, the biker won’t feel as insulted.
I think the first campaign also has messages aimed at both drivers and bikers. Look at the tag lines, Drive Aware is aimed at motorists, and Ride Aware is aimed at motorcyclists.
I agree with Daniel’s points about the second one. I was also more drawn to the second one than the first. For some reason, the first one seemed really wordy (even though both probably have close to the same amount of words – and usually the first one actually has less). But the way the second one is laid out, it just doesn’t seems as wordy (maybe because the words are smaller and there is a picture to capture my interest first – I guess I am a skimmer and need a visual to capture my interest so that I know it’s worth reading). I thought the second was the clear winner until I read everyone’s responses. But then I am just a car driver, not a biker.
#2 is a clear winner for me.
The biker community is very segregated between the Harley types and the sport bike crew. In order to be effective with your audience, your message needs to appeal directly to one or the other — and not both. The Utah campaign suggests that it is appealing to the Harley types in the type styles and use of leather, but the logo looks like a sport bike. The design is simple and clean, but the message (scare tactic) has been done before.
The Colorado campaign is clearly speaking to Harley riders. The message sides with them on the very touchy subject of wearing protective gear. Wear it because there are crazy drivers out there — that, all of the Harley riders can relate to (and so can their friends and family, who can encourage change).
I agree with you, Jess, that the ad needs to appeal to one or the other.
While the first set of adds was more striking, and from a design aspect, probably stronger, I thought the second set was more effective. We’re Harley riders and I always argue with my husband about helmets before we go out. He says he knows what he’s doing. I say I’m not worried about him but the other drivers. I think the second set of ads are more effective at getting that point across. And I agree about mixed signals on the first set of ads. I got a little irritated with them.
i will give it to the second ad, it made more sense in address direct age groups…
The 1st one is the winner. Why? The typography is bold, clean, and you actually read it. The 2nd campaign targeted a certain biker stereotype, which does not represent all bikers. Good design is clear, concise, and direct and the first one nails it!!!!!
I like the first campaign!
The first one is the clear winner.
First campaign for the win. Both art and copy are executed well whilst the other campaign seems to be lacking a clear direction particularly with the art direction. It doesn’t help establish or strengthen the concept and imo the copy is lame, just an opinion.
The first campaign looks far more clever than the second one. The small yellow and black logo also looks kool. The tag line ‘Cars have bumpers Bikes have bones’ specially makes a good message.
I really like the first campaign quite a bit more. It seems to relate to the target audience on a much more relevant level. Also, the copy in the second campaign is a little dull, I think humor being a positive emotion can really help tie an ad’s message to the audience even more so, and the second campaign lacks in this a little bit (though it seems they tried).
Both are good, but the first is definitely of higher quality, and I would imagine brings in better results.
I prefer the second one. As some poster above said, it’d be better to have an analysis of response. We certainly don’t represent the demographic mostly. We can’t say precisely if one campaign is more effective than the other since we are not bikers. I, as a bad ass, tend to relate more to the second one, and blame the other aholes in the road for the accidents. (Everyone wants to believe inside that the blame isn’t theirs, also). Yet, I’m not a biker and I can’t precisely tell if the ads would work and create a correct response from the biker subculture.
I’d go with the second one. The first one also seems like it’s trying to lecture me.
Both of them are actually great accomplishments though, and I tend to think they both did a good job, even if one was more well received.
Wow. This a great campaign. In California, these ads would be very effective.
The grapics on the top designs combined with the text on the middle designs would be best.
The design looks nice in both campaigns. I do like the messaging much better in Utah’s ads though, short and witty. I think Colorado should do one more billboard of the same theme saying “Some of you read these billboards, so I wear safety gear.” They’re a bit too wordy to read at freeway speed.
#2 clear winner for me :) It’s got some kind of style that #1 doesn’t. #1 it’s just boring to me, looks nice, good contrast, but it’s just not interesting.
I like the look of the second campaign, but the repetition is a bit too much for me. “…so I wear safety gear,” yeah we get that. Next please. It’s also a bit wordy, which was stated by multiple other people before.
The first campaign is the winner in my opinion, simple, clean and short copy. So much easier to read when people are going speeds of 60mph on average on any given freeway. Depending on the traffic flow, people are only going to have seconds to read the billboard, too much copy and you’ll lose them, guaranteed.
I think the first campaign is working harder. More unique and clever. The second it seems like I’ve seen these images before.