What do you do when you’re getting crushed by clever advertising? That’s right. You bring in Luke Wilson. That’s AT&T’s strategy, anyway. Big Blue hasn’t taken well to Verizon’s recent string of “map for that” ads. It even turned to the law for help, but since that’s playing out like a high school homecoming rivalry, AT&T decided to “respond.” I guess that’s what you’d call it.
You can watch the ad below, but I think it’s safe to say that when your punch line is “doesn’t start with the letter V,” you should head back to the ol’ drawing board. Really there’s nothing in the ad to get remotely worked up about. Two of the little digs AT&T tries to get in are actually about the iPhone, which could very shortly end up on other networks. The whole thing is just another reminder that AT&T spends its money in all the wrong places, like buying up celebrity airtime instead of improving its infrastructure. Well done, fellas. Well done.
Verizon had to respond to the AT&T lawsuit at some point, but I didn’t think the response would be so catty. And boy is it catty. Verizon lawyers have dropped all the legalese in order to get a few more digs at AT&T and its crappy network.
The response opens like this: “AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts.” So it’s gonna be like that then? And that’s just what the lawyers are saying. Imagine how much worse things could get over the airwaves.
As Engadget points out, the rest of the response reads more like a press release than a legal document. Here’s another tidbit:
In the final analysis, AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon’s side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T’s confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business, and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly.
AT&T might have done well to keep quiet about Verizon’s “map for that” ads. Since bringing a lawsuit concerning the original commercial, Verizon has launched three more ads, all bearing the same message: AT&T’s network sucks. It’s not that the message is anything new, but AT&T has made it clear that network quality is a pressure point, and now Verizon’s going to squeeze.
The new ads will likely air all through the holidays since they’re all about Christmas. In one the iPhone ends up on the island of misfit toys, not fitting in until it shows its new friends the AT&T 3G coverage map. That one works on two levels, digging at AT&T and reminding Apple that Verizon still really wants the iPhone.
The second ad turns the naughty gift from coal into AT&T’s network, and the third features a man having a Blue Christmas (yes, the song runs in the background) until he walks home to find a festive red package sitting on his front porch.
The last two ads sound like the usual competition bashing you see in any industry, but that the commercials have so much truth behind them makes them devastatingly effective. Talk to anyone with an iPhone and you’ll hear about AT&T’s crap network. Apparently no one has mentioned to Big Blue that fixing their network would solve all kinds of problems, the least of which is this new ad campaign.
Verizon’s had some pretty clever ads lately, most of them targeted at AT&T and the iPhone. One of the latest plays on the “There’s an app for that” saying that’s become inextricable from the iPhone. Verizon’s ad instead boasts, “There’s a map for that,” referring to the 3G coverage maps you see in the pictures. AT&T’s taken issue with the ads – so much issue that the iPhone provider is suing – because it claims the ads are misleading.
The bulk of the accusation goes like this:
Consumers are interpreting the white or blank space on the maps to mean that AT&T customers who are not in an AT&T “3G” coverage area have no wireless coverage whatsoever, and therefore have no ability to use their wireless devices for any purposes in vast areas of the country. This interpretation is not surprising as Verizon, in its own coverage maps, uses white space to inform customers that no coverage of any kind exists.
I realize the average American consumer isn’t as tech savvy as you and I, but for people to whom 3G matters I’d say Verizon’s claims are pretty clear. And as someone who has recently moved a fair distance across the country, I can also vouch for the fact that AT&T’s 3G coverage is at least as pathetic as that coverage map shows.
The part of the lawsuit that’s truly entertaining, though, is where AT&T claims Verizon is jealous of the former’s smashing smartphone sales. Sure, AT&T, everyone wishes they were selling the iPhone. You know what no one wants? The massive fallout you’ll see when the iPhone is on every other provider.
