In the wake of a share market analyst's recommendation that shareholders sell Fosters on the back of falling market share, and today's news that VB will enjoy increased advertising support this financial year, the advertising types who frequent mUmBRELLA are getting all worked up about terms like 'positioning' and 'brand value'. If you don't know it, that site is the marketing equivalent of a beer site such as this one where the inhabitants debate the minutiae of IBUs and hop types, but about ad campaigns. The interesting thing in reading the comments is that, judging by the stereotypes being bandied about there, advertising obviously works-even on advertising people.
I don't know too much about advertising strategy, but The Regulars is a funny, funny ad that I would have thought would appeal to everyone, especially the VB target market.
Looking at comments such as "I do not drink VB because it is full of additives and preservatives and gives me the hangover from hell. Even Tooheys New have brushed up their beer ingredients, which is now made additive free." makes me wonder whether CUB spend too much time selling the brand and not the beer. Lion Nathan's Natural Beer Promise (which quickly fell by the wayside with XXXX Gold) did a lot to make beer the focus. Interestingly, with Fosters beers, the comments are generally negative. One of the most common things I hear at all of the lunches and presentations that I do is, "Crown Lager is just VB in a better bottle, isn't it?" With such a widespread and deeply entrenched perception that VB and Crown are made from the same brew, I can't work out why either the perception of VB isnt raised by the misconception (if you believe it, then aren't you buying Crown cheaply?) or why Crown isn't less well-regarded for being "just VB". That said, the comment is generally made to disparage Crown, so the error just might do that.