Seinfeld Microsoft Ads Everyone Hates Not So Bad, After All (MSFT)

Peter Kafka | October 3, 2008 8:58 AM

SeinfeldGates2.pngWhen Microsoft unveiled its Seinfeld/Gates ads last month, the  blogosphere was unanimous: The spots were the WORST ADS EVER CREATED. The hive mind also agreed that the ads for the next part of the campaign, the "I'm A PC" spots, were much, much better.

Here's the thing, though: People love watching the horrible, despicable, please-don't-make-us-see-this-anymore Seinfeld/Gates ads. At least according to video tracking service Visible Measures. It says the Seinfeld/Gates ads have generated 4.3 million more "viral video views" than the new campaign. From the company's blog:

Yes, the Seinfeld/Gates clips have been available for two weeks longer than the "I'm a PC" ads, but normalizing their performance only serves to underscore the broader trend. Looking at each campaign's first week-and-a-half in market, the Seinfeld/Gates ads drove more than 3.2 million viral video views, whereas “I’m a PC” saw barely half of that. After two weeks, Seinfeld/Gates was still collecting more than 700,000 views per day, while the "I'm a PC" clips had tapered off to less than 50,000 views per day.

Meanwhile, we have a confession: We like both campaigns. And the next computer we buy will definitely be a Mac - as soon as we see the new machines Apple introduces this month.

See Also:
Just Admit It: The New Microsoft-Seinfeld Ad Is Funny
Seinfeld's First Microsoft Commercial: Not Funny

Subscribe to SAI: RSS, email newsletter (no spam)

More:

Share:
Post to Del.icio.us


< Prev. Story
Next Story >

10 Comments

Mike said:
It was an ad about nothing, obviously playing on the success of the show about nothing. People were too quick to say they hated b/c the message wasn't laid out clearly enough for them and they actually had to think.

The new ads are better advertisements. They move fast, have music, and their message is clearer. The other ads were more like content. Pretty forward thinking in my opinion, and people were too dumb to get it.
This is what I don't get, Mike: Beyond the fact that someone does or doesn't "get" them, or even enjoy them, what makes one ad better or worse than the other? I could understand evaluating them if they were some kind of direct response ad, or even as part of a campaign designed to promote a specific product. But surely this isn't supposed to goose Vista sales, right?
Joseph Weisenthal (URL) said:
I've noticed that from time to time, it helps to solicit opinions outside of the tech blogosphere.

Seriously though: This past weekend, I went and visited my mom, who up until not that long ago had dialup. Anyway, she asked if I'd seen the Gates/Seinfeld ads. I had, of course, but she still wanted me to watch them again on YouTube. She really liked them.
Mr Oz aka Alessio Gianni (URL) said:
the worst commercial of all time makes a lot of buzz and becomes viral.

The I'm PC ads are just bad, but not enough to attract people.
Jim (URL) said:
I agree they should have stuck with the original approach, at least for a while longer...

http://www.ithinkthisworldisperfect.com/2008/09/brand-about-nothing.html
abe said:
what i really hate are the apple ads - and that they're still running those tired things.
Mike said:
I think most people inherently wanted to see a response to the Mac commercials campaign first, so they were confused by the approach. I think when that didnt happen people were left still wanting that and upset they didnt get that, b/c thats what they expected to get.

I agree they may have dropped the ball by running the Seinfeld campaign first rather than subsequent to the response campaign but the campaign about nothing was still a great idea which generated a ton of buzz

clickbot said:
The new ads are fantastic -- they show "real people" actually doing real, useful, interesting things.

If the economy really goes south, I think there's going to be a backlash against "ipod hipsterism" (folks who twitter and blog on their iphone all day) in favor of the folks (products) depicted in these ads.

Great timing.
Dave said:
what's not to hate? this spot is horribly written, terribly produced, and wretchedly acted. plus, the new 'Bill Gates' is just plain creepy to look at. but the worst offense of all is that this ad is pointless. why trying to compete with a much better OS, just show the current benefits? i mean, i don't generally like to speak ill of the non-living, but mr. Gates was not exactly the most lovable character in his day. seems to me that cpb is in a bit of a tailspin as of late. their bk work is spotty at best, the vw work is generally awful, the new haggar ads are lifeless and now this. maybe the reason they are moving so many people to boulder is because the mountains offer more places to hide.
KenC said:
The problem with "I'm pissy" ads, is that it's not at all clear that these people can use computers. It looks like the ad agency tried to find as many unusual-looking people from around the globe to say, "i'm pissy", but yet never show them using one. I liked the ad, initially, which may be due to how low a bar the Seinfeld ad had set, but the more I see it, the more I realize it says almost nothing, kind of like the "wow" ads, or the "where do you want to go today" ads. Actually, this feels alot like the "where do you want to go today" ads. Isn't that almost the same thing as windows without walls?

Join the discussion



Copyright © 2008 Silicon Alley Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.