Because I only watch a smidgen of TV, I’m getting confused about the advertisements for Bell and Rogers. I recall seeing this ad for Rogers with the red/blue couch split in the middle:

But then I’ve also seen ads for Bell with another couch, this one was quite a bit longer and more on the blue side. I could swear that that was a Bell ad. So I’m just confused as to which brand these sofas are supposed to evoke, Bell or Rogers?

I tried looking online for a Bell example as comparison, but they don’t have their commercials posted (get with the times Bell). Instead, I found an article in The Star that had the same idea as me.

The battle waged on a common couch started June 1, when Rogers launched an ad campaign with a two-seater, half red, half blue, saying its home phone service was a better buy – $25 less – than Bell’s.

Bell reacted quickly and launched the couch ad by June 16, this time with five blue cushions and one red, its way of expanding the conversation. The ad notes that Bell has more TV channels and is $25 less expensive than Rogers. Bell also went after Rogers’ wireless service, comparing a Rogers cellphone to a Bell cellphone.

I think this is a waste of money. Roger’s is spending money building a mnemonic, but Bell is paying money to associate the same mnemonic with itself. I don’t think they’re doing themselves a favor with their consumers either, since this sounds like two brothers fighting it out in public.

Posted by Kevin in Blogs Tags: advertising, corporations, rogers