I must start off by saying that I qualify for free Viagra, still being on the retiree Pfizer medical plan. Actually I am a “firee” not a retiree, but I qualify anyway for continued coverage, having worked enough years at Warner-Lambert to continue on the Pfizer plan after they took us over. That bias towards Viagra now disclosed I will comment on the sex brands of DTC.
I like the Viagra and Cialis ads very much. What is really great is that I can tell the difference between the two. Viagra uses the manly man approach. Their creative shows a handsome, hard working early 50ish guy who has the confidence to use Viagra. These guys, according to the ads ?know how to get things done.? Another execution of the ad says, ?Knows how to make things happen.? A third says,?knowing what needs to be done.? These guys are rugged. They are like Tom Selleck.
Cialis on the other hand is much more female centric. Their guys like romance, which could happen?any time. A little flirtatious smile may be all it takes to need to be ready for sex. Cialis uses the tub icon to emphasize that Cialis is for the romantically inclined. All their ads prominently feature the female partner on the road to sex.
Both drugs do the same thing and lead to a good quality erection. The great thing about the positioning is they are very different and therefore memorable. Many DTC ads look the same, even within their category. I have a hard time telling you what is different about many ads. The ED brands have done a masterful job for years staking out a clear creative position. In a way they represent two sides of the same man. Men can want sex without romance but also appreciate a nice cuddle once in awhile. Viagra is lust, Cialis is romantic spooning. Same guy different needs. Levitra which has not advertised in years used to use Mike Ditka as a television spokesman. I guess you could say they also used to manly man style.
I just saw a female-focused ad for Osphena, a new drug targeted to post-menopausal women who have a decrease in moisture. That dryness interferes with sex because of pain. This ad is visually attractive. A late 40ish pretty woman tells us that sex need not be painful because of dryness. The ad then shows a late 50ish woman with gray hair in alluring poses. Both women seem very happy with their new moisture. I would say doing any commercial on the subject of vaginal dryness can be a tough task. This ad, however, was tastefully done and appealing. Taking this approach, however, may not represent the average middle aged women. The women in the commercial are out of a cover of a romance novel, not the mall in Michigan. I would be anxious to hear what real post menopausal women think of the ad.
Like the erectile dysfunction ads, I assume there will be complaints about what time these ads air. A few parents may complain about being asked by their kids about a dry vagina just as they complained about four hour erections. These same parents do not seem to complain about the sexy beer ads, violent video game ads, or movie trailers showing people getting blown up. That being said, discussing actual sex aids seems to have a special place for criticism in our more puritanical society. I look forward to some conservative male member of Congress questioning an ad exec on dry vaginas. CSPAN will get an X rating that day.
Comments are closed.