Some Companies Find They Get More Mileage When Ads Are Rejected

When CBS--and initially NBC--refused to run L.A Gear’s TV spot for its new sneaker last week, L.A. Gear figured that the best way to get even was to cry foul.

“I got a bomb dropped on me by the networks,” said Sandy Saemann, L.A. Gear executive vice president. “I had to find a way to maximize whatever was thrown at me.”

So, the sneaker maker shipped off biting press releases that lambasted the networks. Stories about the rejected ad for high-tech Catapult shoes appeared in the Los Angeles Times, New York Times and Wall Street Journal. “Entertainment Tonight” and CNN aired splashy stories on it. Finally, late last week, NBC relented and agreed to run the ad.

L.A. Gear is just one of a host of advertisers who, during the past few years, have discovered that arejected ad can garner free publicity more valuable than paid advertising. For example, the blue jeans maker No Excuses enjoyed publicity aplenty when its ad proved to be too controversial for the networks.

“There is growing concern at the networks about this,” said Beth Bressan, vice president of program practices at CBS. “At a time when advertising is soft, we are concerned about any exposure for potential advertisers that is given for free.”

But the ethical issues may be even more troubling. Although most advertisers create ads with the full intention of getting them aired, some quietly hope that their ads will be rejected so they can garner gobs of publicity by griping publicly about it.

Perhaps the expert at this is No Excuses jeans. Last year, shortly after the romantic links between Donald J. Trump and Marla Maples became banner headlines, the jeans maker paid Maples more than $100,000 to appear in a TV spot and a print ad. The ad featured Maples, decked in No Excuses jeans, tossing copies of National Enquirer cover stories about her into a trash can.

The major TV networks all rejected the ad. And that’s just what No Excuses wanted. After all, the tiny company had an annual ad budget of less than $1 million. “We knew we could get a lot more publicity if the networks didn’t accept it,” said Neil Cole, president of New Retail Concepts, the New York company that makes No Excuses jeans.

In fact, the networks that rejected the ad did news stories based on critical press releases by No Excuses. Since then, Cole has been criticized for using the networks and the media for his own gain. “We didn’t break any laws,” he said. “We’re just trying to sell jeans and make money for our stockholders.”

No stranger to such criticism is Jeffrey Goodby, co-founder of the San Francisco agency Goodby, Berlin & Silverstein. In 1988, his agency created a provocative TV and print campaign for the San Francisco Examiner in which local Bay Area newscasts were ridiculed.

One spot featured Publisher William Randolph Hearst III dropping a TV set off a building. The falling set is tuned to a newscast. Only one network affiliate aired the ad. That’s all it took. “We knew if we could get it out there once, it would create a stir,” Goodby said.

Did it ever. Several San Francisco TV stations broadcast angry editorials against the ad, and “The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour” aired a lengthy segment on it. By one estimate, the Examiner got about $6 million in free publicity for a campaign on which it spent a fraction of that.

Hardee’s Food Systems Stays With Ogilvy

In a selection that surprised just about everyone except executives at the New York agency Ogilvy & Mather, Rocky Mount, N.C.-based Hardee’s Food Systems on Monday agreed to keep its much sought-after $80-million annual ad business at Ogilvy.

The loss of Hardee’s “would have created a major financial problem for us,” said Graham Phillips, chairman and chief executive of Ogilvy, in an interview Monday.

Since the account went into review in November, there has been speculation that the New York office of Chiat/Day/Mojo had a leg up on the business. But Ogilvy prevailed. “When there’s a review for a piece of your business, it’s always a difficult situation,” Phillips said. “You have to come from behind to win.”

Janik Wins Account After 11-Year Chase

Dick Janik’s prayers were answered Monday when his Los Angeles media buying service, Janik & Associates, won the annual $15-million account to buy TV advertising time for the Worldwide Church of God, publisher of Plain Truth magazine and producer of “The World Tomorrow” TV show.

Janik said he has been chasing after the Pasadena-based church since his media buying service opened 11 years ago.

He knew his chances improved back in 1988, when the Worldwide Church switched the business from BBDO’s Los Angeles office to the same agency’s Atlanta office, indicating concern about BBDO.

“While a lot of agencies in town are letting people go, we’re one that’s now hiring,” Janik said.

He expects to hire six employees to work on the new business.

Gulf War Brings Ad Rate Hike at CNN

Cable News Network is vastly increasing some of its advertising rates as a result of the huge ratings jump it has enjoyed during its Persian Gulf War coverage.

A 30-second prime-time TV spot that cost $5,000 to $10,000 before the war now sells for about $20,000, said Joe Uva, executive vice president of CNN sales.

The higher rates, however, will probably be lowered once the war ends and viewership is expected to decline, he said.

The network is also trying to renegotiate with some current advertisers who purchased commercial time back when then network’s average viewership was about 20% of what it is now.

Uva insists that CNN is not taking advantage of the war. “All we’re doing is saying to advertisers, ‘In light of the fact we’re generating such a large audience, let’s be fair.’ ”

Prime-time viewership of CNN that was about 800,000 before the war is now about 4.5 million.

“The cost to CNN of covering the war is extreme,” Uva said. “There is no way, in the short term, that we will ever be able to generate enough ad sales revenue to cover the bill.”