Ok so Vodacom has been red for a while now and I had a lot of concerns about their red campaign but didn’t get around to blogging about it, so as much as it is old news, it’s my blog and I want to write about it NOW :) What triggered this was a short article in the June issue of Destiny magazine (page 18 titled Service Dividers) that I was reading on my flight back from Nairobi where they were actually also sharing the same concerns that I had about Vodacom’s red campaign…why shout so much about a change in colour?
You could argue that Cell C did the same thing when they re-branded but the difference with Cell C is that they married their campaign with improvements in their service and benefits plus they also used a celebrity, Trevor Noah as the face of the campaign to give their consumers “reason to believe” in their campaign. (We could discuss on another day how risky it was of Cell C to use a comedian for this campaign as it could have been difficult for consumers to take him seriously and see the whole campaign as a joke?)
Vodacom spent R200 million just to tell us that they had changed their branding from blue to red and not only were their frequent adverts very irritating but there really wasn’t much that you could get from them that added any value to the brand. The campaign did not communicate any new benefits for consumers, improvements in service or any call to action for that matter, why pass up the opportunity to tell us that you can give us more benefits, faster and more efficient service with such a huge budget? Which brand manager approved this waste of good time and money? Telecommunication companies are swimming in money, their summer campaigns are proof of this but using R200m to shout about a change in colour is a waste of money that could have been used for a CSI campaign that could have helped vodacom to be seen in a better light because R200m later, I still would not move to them..