Microsoft gives Seinfeld $10 million to shill Vista
We’ve known for a while that Microsoft has a $300 million budget earmarked for upcoming marketing, with a particular emphasis on Vista. It’s now emerged that $10 million of that is going in the pocket of Jerry Seinfeld.
Insiders tell the Wall Street Journal the comedian will appear in ads alongside Bill Gates debuting on 4 September. The campaign’s slogan appears to be “Windows, Not Walls”, apparently a knock at what Microsoft considers Apple’s tighter development restrictions. Indeed, the celebrity tie-in appears to be something of a fightback against the “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” campaign.
Marketing types are already speculating that the choice of Seinfeld came from the idea of picking somebody fun and unstuffy, but without trying to be overly trendy and cutting-edge, which probably wouldn’t fly given the company’s corporate giant image. That could explain rumours Microsoft picked Seinfeld after also considering Will Ferrell and Chris Rock.
Of course, TV nerds have already pointed out that Seinfeld (playing himself) owned a Mac in the sitcom and even appeared in a Mac ad that aired during the series finale.
The funniest suggestion I’ve heard for an ad format so far (albeit one that would probably do little to boost Microsoft) is to spoof the Seinfeld episode where Jerry and pals see who can go the longest without pleasuring themselves. The suggested twist in the spoof? Who can go longest on their chosen operating system without having to reboot.
Despite the campaign’s huge costs, it could easily pay for itself if it hits the target. Given that Windows was worth almost $17 billion to Microsoft last year, the $300 million budget only needs to boost sales by 2% to pay off.
It’ll be interesting to see the comparative effectiveness of this campaign – the work of highly-paid ad agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky, the team behing Burger King’s Subservient Chicken – and the Mojave experiment videos, developed in-house by Microsoft staff.
Related Posts:
August 21st, 2008
If they have a $300 budget as you say in the first line, they must have switched over to US government fiscal policy if they overspend it by a mere $9,999,700.
August 21st, 2008
Ken – thanks for the pick-up! (To later readers: the piece has been corrected since Ken’s comment.)
August 21st, 2008
Microsoft? Out of touch? Never!
August 22nd, 2008
Given that Vista is such a joke, I think it is entirely appropriate that Microsoft have engaged a comedian to advertise it. Bill Gates, though, is another matter entirely – he comes across as wooden at the best of times.
Seinfeld and Gates together would surely come across as “the odd couple”, but perhaps Microsoft are just attempting to copy Apple again. Poor old Microsoft: perennial followers, with not an original idea in their collective heads.
August 24th, 2008
Why oh why did Microsoft spend that much to spend on an Operating system that half the PC population doesnt like. Why didnt Microsoft just spend that on making Vista cheaper to buy (like AUS$100-) instead of us paying AUS$300+. That way people would have bought it for a much lower price and people wouldnt buy dodgy copies. That way EVERYONE would be happy!!!
Anyone else agree?
August 25th, 2008
@Pat,
The reason that Microsoft is charging like a wounded bull is because it believes it can. The behaviour is typical of this company, having as it does a very long history of abusing its monopoly.
Sadly for Microsoft, they are facing a number of problems, which, taken individually, would probably not prove insurmountable. However, it appears that the confluence of these problems is causing considerable difficulties for the Redmond gang.
One problem for Microsoft is that they are fighting history, which shows that a monopoly can only survive if it does not charge a “monopoly rent”. A monopoly rent is made possible by lack of real competition, and yields what are known as “supernormal profits”. Have a squiz at Microsoft’s profit margins some time: they are supernormal – and they come from milking the customers.
Which brings us to some of the other problems that Microsoft is having – the customers are *tired* of being milked, the “latest” OS (2003 in drag) is a particularly pathetic incarnation, the price rise was just a little too steep (an indication of hubris at Microsoft), and there are alternatives (that is, there is now viable competition).
So Microsoft has – thanks to a very poor-quality product and incredibly bad business judgement – put itself in a very tricky position where it is teetering on a tightrope. Some assert that this is not true, and point to Microsoft’s continued domination of the market, but competitors don’t need to make a big dent in Microsoft’s market share – they just need enough to make Microsoft have to justify its products and its prices, which is something that it cannot do.
If you believe Microsoft, it has a healthy cash flow and large cash reserves. Although this may delay the day of reckoning, the day will still come. It’s the same with the price of Vista – they could have played for a little more time by charging less, but they chose to make a grab for the cash. Whatever their reasoning, they are eventually going to have a very bruising encounter with “Mr Market”, and this is causing a great deal of anxiety at Microsoft – at least for those who are not in denial.
And to answer your last question, no, I don’t agree. I wouldn’t buy Vista at any price. I run Linux, which performs brilliantly, is rock solid, never gets virii or malware, and cost me nothing. Unbeatable speed, stability, and security, and a price that can’t be undercut – I bet Microsoft wish they could produce something like that.