Independent and intellectual thoughts ranging from China, SEO, and other international topics
14 Feb
Correction (2/18/2008):
Jay Minkoff from First Flavor corrects the impression that the ad is actually something you straight up lick, but rather includes a tamper-proof pouch (similar to the breath strips) that one can take out and try. Though very specific, I do believe that creates a huge difference in how the product is perceived and in my opinion is far more likely to do better when people are already familiar with breath strips. Thus, these should be considered “edible ads” rather than “lickable ads.”
—–
Mmm… I am not quite sure how effective this is going to be (beyond the novelty factor) for a lickable ad to appear in magazines:
2 Responses for "Lickable Ads"
As the president of First Flavor http://www.FirstFlavor.com, the company bringing this Peel ‘n Taste product to market, there is a major correction to the WSJ article: This is not about Lickable Ads. Welch’s used the term ‘lick’ in their ad and no one seems to have bothered to read the fine print.
Our product, which can be attached to a print ad and peeled off, is a sealed tamper evident foil pouch containing a piece of edible film. (Similar to popular breath strips.) One peels opens the pouch and places the piece of edible film on your tongue. The edible film dissolves quickly leaving you with a burst of flavor. No licking involved!
The point that was really missed was that finally consumers now have a way of trying the taste of a product before they buy it. We call it taking a product for a ‘Taste Drive’!
I knew about the sealed tamper-proof pouch, but had not heard about the edible film like the breath strips. That definitely makes more sense and will update this to note that. Thank you for the correction!
Few people ever do read the fine prints–even when there was a secret prize within the fine print, it took nearly a week or longer before someone actually read it and won $1000.
Leave a reply