In that regard, how do you measure the validity of any marketing campaign? I pass a laser hair removal billboard every day on my way to work and yet I’ve never “gone under the laser”. How do you measure the effectiveness of that billboard vs. the Helzberg billboard, vs. any other advertisment?

Secondly, in response to your comment “I wouldn’t call it positive buzz” please please don’t tell me you’re suggesting that there is such a thing as “bad buzz?” Getting people talking about your product has been a major goal of every marketing professional since the first caveman tried to sell the wheel to his neighbor. Horses playing football do not add to my happy hour experience, and yet Budweiser spends millions on super bowl ads every year. Are they totally ineffective also?

The bottom line is that Helzberg spent a couple of thosand dollars on a billboard, and got 107,000 views a day, plus newspaper coverage, plus word of mouth, plus blog posting after blog posting after blog posting. Pretty good return on investment in my book. No one in Kansas City is talking about Tivol, or Kay, or Zales. Everyone is talking about Helzberg.

Well, I think the obvious conclusion is that the Helzberg ads are not targeted toward women. That’s a given. I doubt the agency would be upset that women are not driven to their stores.

Also, not all advertising utilizes the web drive- which should be a given as well. Helzberg is a company that has a strong branding here in the Kansas City area, and is headed here. The web is not somewhere people would need to visit to complete the cycle. It would be going to the stores, and again- not all media would need to be tracked for this purpose. If they were looking to drive higher sales through online purchases- then they would not be going about it right. However, I doubt that many men purchase their engagement rings online without visiting in person.

Also- I am sure there are “missing keys” to this campaign, however this is a campaign- it integrates different mediums and we are fixating on the one billboard.

Also- you’re right- nobody knew the brand initially- which I believe engrains it moreso now that the brand is revealed. “Hey- did you see that proposal billboard? It has been up for several weeks now- that must have cost him a fortune… yada yada..” Now- “Hey- you know that proposal billboard? I guess it was Helzberg- ‘That guy proposes on a billboard…” Score 100 for brand recall.

Folks were simply searching for what was going on through internet searches PRIOR to the brand reveal. You won’t find that so much anymore. You can guarantee more folks will head to Helzberg or Barkley now.

I personally think this was excellent, highly creative, clever, and if nothing else did create a buzz. Purpose served. Bravo, Barkley.

“When it comes to an advertising concept, in order to work in a viral perspective, the concept needs to add value to the user’s experience. This value can be explicated in something entertaining, in something educational or in something rewarding. I agree that the billboard was entertaining, but does it fit in adding to the user’s experience?”

Where was the user experience? There was certainly no follow-thru and how many people do you really think walked into Helzberg to purchase an engagement ring based on that campaign?

While the billboard stirred some buzz among the Kansas City circuit I wouldn’t call it positive buzz nor would I say that it drove people to their stores - especially women.

The marketing campaign had great potential with good execution, but poor follow-thru. I would not call that success.

In today’s business world, it’s really easy to forget that good marketing doesn’t mean driving people to your web site, it’s goal is to get people talking and drive them to your stores. Good or bad, that billboard is creating a hell of a lot of buzz.

Personally let me say, I love it when people leave anonymous comments.

You basically duplicated the same point I made:

“Actually I think you can track the campaign via google. Search for jennifer marry me billboard. What is the first post that comes up?

http://www.lauralake.com/marry-me-billboard-style/80/”

They did not back up the push, therefore from a viral campaign perspective it failed. People searched for it, yes - but they did not find Helzberg. That’s the problem with this campaign.

Let’s go back to my post:

“When it comes to an advertising concept, in order to work in a viral perspective, the concept needs to add value to the user’s experience. This value can be explicated in something entertaining, in something educational or in something rewarding. I agree that the billboard was entertaining, but does it fit in adding to the user’s experience?”

Where was the user’s experience? Where was the follow-through? They made people question the billboard to that I say “so what?” Do you really think it made them go buy engagement rings?

Hmmmmm….enquiring minds still wonder.