It's Legal, but is it good?

Last week, I sang the praises of Dentyne and how their marketing department scored big with their one-liner ads. Today let us take a detailed look at a set of ads from a very different company, the restaurant chain, Legal Seafoods.

Let us begin with the commonalities between the Dentyne and Legal Seafood ads.

  • Like the Dentyne ads, the Legal Seafoods are placed collectively, usually in pairs to increase the impact.
  • Like Dentyne ads, these ads use oneliners to grab attention
  • Like the Dentyne ads, these ads are placed to attract T patrons.
Now, let us look at the differences:
  • Unlike the Dentyne ads, these ads are not placed on the train, but on the far walls of the station, away from the commuter, making them difficult to read,especially in darker platforms like South Station.
  • The colors used, do not help in making them readable. The background is simply too dark and makes it painful for anyone to read.
    What adjectives come to your mind when you see them? Drab and dreary come to mind. In many ways, the ads defeat the essense of the spirit of Legal Seafood: Freshness is the last thing that comes to mind when one sees these ads.
  • The one-liners are actually are catchy enough. They would have been more effective with better visuals than an obscure fishing boat on shown here.
Then one key question comes to mind. Who is the target audience for this ad? Who is the typical Legal Seafood patron? How many people who take the T could fit this profile?

Personally, I would feel that placing these ads on the commuter rail would have been a better idea. Placing them at strategic locations in Boston's Financial District would be most effective.

To summarize, I feel that these ads fall short in effectively communicating their message for the following reasons: the lack of focus on a target audience, the choice of visuals simply does not work, and finally the dark background that diminishes legibilty.

blog comments powered by Disqus