Love the simplicity of this comparative vodka advertisement:

Fair use by Platinka? Sorry Grey Goose, I think so.

Dear readers, do you agree?

  • James Mahoney

    Classic example of a bad idea. The intention is to position the product against the market leader. The conceit is that X product is so good that the market leader will be vanquished to the “so yesterday” or the “also ran” bin, or even blown completely out of your mind.

    However, to the question Grey Who?, you and everyone else immediately responds Grey Goose. Thus Platinka reinforces the market awareness of Grey Goose. When you’re a smaller player trying to establish marketshare, why would you spend your budget to reinforce awareness of the competition?

    Competitive advertising can work, of course. Early on, Grey Goose, for example, ran ads that listed the ranking of vodkas in blind taste tests. Spoiler alert: GG was ranked highest. That’s an effective way to make inroads against the market leader.

    But for ads like this one, Platinka would be better served by pushing their own distinctiveness rather than playing the pretender to the throne.

    To your question, Steve, I doubt that any Grey Goose feathers are ruffled by this ad.