Our service, which includes both designing and placing advertisements, is by far the most effective in the industry. For instance, we recently designed and placed a series of advertisements of an apparel company using a golfer as a spokesman. Before the series of ads, a survey showed that only 8 percent of people who described themselves as non-golfers had heard of the apparel company. After the series of ads, despite the golfer making national headlines by becoming the youngest golfer ever to win a major professional tournament, over 80 percent of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company.
The advertising agency’s argument is very weak and does not provide solid evidences to prove the effectiveness of their advertising abilities. The agency uses a survey result to claim that the apparel brand was a hit and assumes that the brand was a huge hit only because of advertisement. The agency does not even strongly justify that it was choice of golfer which made the brand hit. Thus, the agency’s argument is far too weak for serious consideration and fails to substantiate convincing evidences.
First, the agency cites a survey result to claim that the apparel brand was launched successfully. However, there is no more information about the credibility of survey. Who all were included in survey? Did they include only those people who stay near to the company showrooms? If so, it’s possible that these people heard about the brand because of their proximity to showroom.
In addition, the survey does not state whether the people heard about the advertisement but rather states that these people heard about the apparel brand. So, even if we assume that survey was done on credible sample size it’s also possible that the apparel brand became popular because of its pricing and quality and not the advertisement. Therefore the effectiveness of advertisement is not proved.
Furthermore, the brochure implies that it was the choice of young golfer as spokesperson which led to success of apparel using 80% of people surveyed as example however the claim does not include any information about the people who are not golf fans. It’s possible that majority of apparel brand customers are non golf fans and they will still not be attracted to brand.
The agency’s claim can be strengthened if it’s shown that: (1) The survey had credible sample size. (2) The survey includes people of all strata of society. (3) Majority of the people of survey stated they heard about brand because of new advertisement (4) Most of the people cites their enticement to brand a result of a choice of golfer as spokesperson.
As cited above, the agency’s claim rests of far too many assumptions and weak evidences. Unless its claims are strengthened by several factors as stated above, they do not appear effective. Therefore, I do not agree with agency’s claim of effective advertising.