Categories
Archives
- July 2010 (1)
- June 2010 (1)
- May 2010 (5)
- April 2010 (5)
- March 2010 (3)
- February 2010 (2)
- January 2010 (2)
- December 2009 (2)
- November 2009 (2)
- October 2009 (5)
- September 2009 (2)
- August 2009 (4)
- July 2009 (5)
- June 2009 (7)
- May 2009 (5)
- April 2009 (11)
- March 2009 (13)
- February 2009 (12)
- January 2009 (6)
- October 2008 (3)
- September 2008 (5)
- August 2008 (2)
- July 2008 (1)
- February 2008 (2)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (1)
- October 2007 (1)
- April 2007 (1)
- April 2005 (1)
UA : Image vs. Innovation
When Baltimore, Maryland-based Under Armour exploded onto the scene 13 years ago, they were known for fabric that wicked moisture and kept you cool and dry. Their apparel was the first of its kind, and the product established them as a company that developed innovative performance gear that was miles ahead of the curve.
About 10 years later they extended the brand to include footwear, starting with cleats, which were promoted with the highly regarded “click clack” advertising campaign. While the campaign went on to win numerous awards, I always had a feeling that the strength of the campaign was its reach and frequency (read: $), and not its creative or strategic merit. After all, the marketing never really made clear what was truly unique and different about the cleats (truthfully, there were many new technologies integrated into the product). There was no mention of innovative new features or materials — just the promise that they make noise on paved surfaces…
Shortly after debuting footwear that actually claimed innovative technologies like Footsleeve, Armourlastic, Armourguide and Armourbound, news broke that they’re coming out with a new technology that when worn helps athletes recover faster from vigorous workouts. This is exactly the type of groundbreaking product that consumers expect from Under Armour. But will they choose to focus on a slick image campaign as they did with their cleats, or will they focus on the innovative aspects of the product?

I hope it’s the latter. While the big spending on an image campaign does work in the short-term, typically when that stops, it’s crucial to make sure customers understand the product (or service) benefits, because those are what are going to carry the product. Sure, image advertising has worked for Nike, but that’s both because they’ve been around for a while and have grown to a size where they can spend TONS of money on brand advertising. As Under Armour develops a campaign, it can and should still have a strong creative “big idea” but I truly believe that they need to make sure that it develops the product, not just the brand.
Curious to know what type of advertising strategy will help you get the most bang for your buck? The Sutter Group knows marketing strategy. And the best part is that not only can we help you develop marketing strategy, but we do some pretty amazing creative too. Talk to us.
by








Comments
There are no comments for this entry yet.