March 7, 2008
Lickable Ads Arrive
By Tom Ryan
Welch’s has introduced what’s believed to be the first-ever consumer ad in a magazine enabling readers to sample a product by licking the ad. The full-page print ads in People magazine last month showed a huge bottle of its grape juice, while the back had a strip that peels up and off, with text that reads: “For a TASTY fact, remove & LICK.”
While scent technology — scratch-and-sniff ads or fragrant ink — is commonplace in magazines, lickable ads are still in the experimental stage.
First Flavor, the developer of the technology behind the ad, also did in-store marketing patches for a new flavor from Arm & Hammer Advance White toothpaste. First Flavor has also experimented with flavors from cheese pizza to soymilk and children’s cold medicines. In some lickable ads, including Welch’s, some of the essence of the actual product is added to the strip, while others use both natural and artificial flavors to simulate the taste.
Some marketers clearly remain squeamish about lickable ads, according to The Wall Street Journal. Since magazines are often passed from reader to reader, there’s a high chance saliva could be left on an ad.
“We struggled with the concept,” Greg Castronuovo, senior vice president and group account director at Initiative, a media buyer that bought a lickable ad for CBS. “There is a lot of pass-along in magazines — I had a little bit of aversion to it; it’s a little unsanitary, perhaps.”
According to First Flavor, readers are supposed to peel off the entire sticker on the Welch’s ad before licking. If someone doesn’t rip off the whole sticker, First Flavor told the Journal, the flap can’t reseal, giving consumers an easy way to know whether the ad has already been licked.
Still, even Welch’s suspects some consumers passed on the free taste test. “A lot of people won’t lick a magazine no matter how good it tastes,” said Chris Heye, Welch’s marketing chief.
But Paul Caine, president of Time Inc.’s Entertainment Group, which includes People magazine, believes adding taste creates a new way to grab reader attention. The theory goes that using multiple senses to process ads helps consumers build a stronger connections with brands.
“It’s hard to forget whose brand you are licking,” Lisa Haverty, a cognitive scientist who works in the marketing field, told the Journal. “”If the taste is unpleasant or not good, the ad could flop worse than a regular ad.”
Discussion Questions: What do you think of the marketing potential around lickable ads in magazines?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Lickable ads are a bad idea. Even though a person can tell if the strip has been opened already, this does not stop a child or an adult with poor decision-making skills from “re-licking.” It is definitely a lawsuit waiting to happen when the first child gets sick after licking an ad that their classmate or sibling with the flu already licked.
Plus, the very idea of licking a magazine is not appealing. I would not want my brand associated with this practice. True sampling is the way to get the flavor of a product into a customers’ mouth.
Funniest quote on RetailWire today: “…it’s a little unsanitary, perhaps” (Greg Castronuovo, VP of Initiative). Face it: lickable ads are no more disgusting than most advertising, just “a little unsanitary, perhaps.” Next time you see a child drop her ice cream cone on the ground, you can tell her it’s “just a little unsanitary, perhaps.”
Why not make a billboard lickable too? Who is going to really lick the ad? A kid maybe? Then when the kid gets sick they can blame the ad…I agree: it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Next time Welch’s wants to try sampling a new taste, maybe they could try a fruit roll-up type give-away. Individually wrapped candies as a give-away at cash registers could get a lot of penetration closer to the point of sale.
I have had this ad on my desk for over a week, showing it to everyone and getting reactions. First of all, most moms I work with said “Ewww, gross” or something close to it when they read the headline. But in reality, once you pull off the insert, it really is a taste strip, which is a concept that is way more appealing to consumers overall. In fact, lots of the women I showed it to actually wanted to taste it to see if it really tasted like Welch’s, and it does!
So, perhaps one of the problems is the headline. If the message were delivered as a “taste” offer instead of a “lick” offer, the message would be more effective. That said, there should also be copy to advise the reader that if the “holder” has been opened and the taste strip is still there, they should not consume.
One last comment. The entire ad could have been executed on one page.
I think this will be grounds for a slew of lawsuits. Who can say what manner the magazines are stored once they leave the printers? How can Welch’s make sure the samples are not contaminated or tampered with? I would NEVER lick one!
OK, I’ll begin with the obligatory “ick” but I think much of the fear here is ungrounded. Yes, kids will lick anything (I think that’s been proven by paste-eaters long ago), but are you going to sue an aseptic pack manufacturer for encouraging kids to share Yoo-Hoo at the lunch table? As a lawyer once told us, “You can sue anybody for anything.”
And why is this any less sanitary than any packaged food item? Is grabbing a slice of greasy pepperoni off an un-sneeze-guarded sampling plate at the deli counter more sanitary? (Saw a bunch of customers doing that just the other day.) And then there are, you know, envelopes…anyone ever licked one of those…or received one licked by a flu sufferer? Are we up in arms about those little Typhoid Marys of the stationary category?
In the pantheon of great inventions, I don’t think lickables will upset sliced bread from its exalted pedestal, but do I think people may overcome their initial gag reflex on this idea.
I couldn’t agree more with the comments about lawsuits and questionable judgment. Putting aside those concerns, which all by themselves should have killed this in it’s pre-infancy, I’m struggling to understand the marketing value of the approach.
Can we really see scores of lickable ads in magazines? As a one-off buzz factor tactic, it’s a good idea. Welch’s got some print, some attention, and the PR factor is probably worth ten times the value of the ad. Beyond that…no, this is NOT a new and explosive medium for reaching the consumer. What if your product really didn’t taste that wonderful, but you could make a lickable ad that did? Is that false advertising? When taste is subjective?
This is silly.
Budweiser has an ad on the web where a guy spills his Bud on a laddie magazine. Rather than waste the beer he licks it off as his girl friend walks in the door. Her look tells the future of lickable ads for most consumer products.
“A little unsanitary, perhaps.” ????? A LITTLE unsanitary?
This has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen come out of the advertising industry and I’ve been watching dumb and outlandish things come out of there for over fifty years now.
The marketing idea has very good potential, but the marketing execution is questionable. I agree with Anne Howe that the way the message was delivered is a problem. Just reading the main copy: “For a TASTY fact, remove & LICK.” is not appealing at all. What tasty fact? And you have to lick the page? Based on the majority of comments the idea of having to “lick” something is what is throwing everybody off from this idea. It gives a very unfavorable visual impression.
Alternatively what they could have done for the copy was to approach it by simply stating, “Taste Welch’s right now!” For the tasting part, have a one piece strip similar to the Listerine strips where the consumer can somehow peel it away from the magazine (this removes the saliva on magazine issue), and have a one time “taste” of the product. Having the consumer press their face to a magazine page to “lick” the product is not properly communicating what Welch’s ultimately wants the consumer to do, which is to taste the favor of the product. In addition having a cents-off coupon on the page is another compelling idea so the consumer can just tear the page out–end of story.
I wish the product/marketing companies would have consulted with people from this forum, because I think we could save them a lot time and money.
One more vote here for advertising gross-out award of the year. Sure kids will eat things dropped (the three second rule), but that is not the point. Brand equity is at stake here. Where are the Health & Wellness cops when you need them? Contamination and germs aside, what is this stuff? Wholesome grapes? Not so much.
Hate to go with the crowd, but this is a stunningly bad idea. Potential of lawsuits galore, of course, but also the core idea is flawed. What are the chances that these will taste bad when they get to consumers? What if the consumer had just eaten something that doesn’t well with this? I honestly can’t see how this ends well.
North Americans are phobic about germs–what better way to spread them than through lickable magazines? Our children would be the audience that MIGHT actually lick a magazine (I can’t see me doing that, regardless of the flavour).
After we read our magazines at home, we take them to our fitness center, to be enjoyed by others. A lickable magazine would have pages stuck together (and sticky?), never mind the germs that are floating throughout the magazine as each different person turns the pages with saliva on their fingers. Hmmm…can’t picture it being a big marketing breakthrough….
Lickable ads are probably the grossest thing since smell o vision. Aren’t we trying to stem all these viruses and flus? How is this going to help our already fragile immune systems? If I saw this in a magazine I would not let my girls even touch it–used or not. Gross gross gross. And I do mean gross.
I think this is a GREAT idea! Anything that can engage the consumer is going to create a positive ROI. The concept of “tryvertising” continues to gain acceptance in the marketplace, and if Welch’s can get people to taste their product from an ad, and engage another one of the consumer’s senses, they will be way ahead of the game. More CPG companies will be using this technology. Great use of technology married with creative.
Oh my…who would do this? Amazing that someone sold Welch’s on this idea.
This may be a sad commentary on life in America, but doesn’t this just sound like a lawsuit waiting to happen?
I checked with my kids, and they loved they idea!
It’s definitely worth trying. Just make sure it’s truly a one-time seal so that my kids don’t pass their germs around.
Once again it seems that a lack of innovative ideas that could be built around a brand’s core message has resulted in a desperate grasp at some unconventional tactics.
I cannot imagine anyone actually wanting to lick a piece of paper, much less getting excited about the taste enough to want to purchase the product.
I suppose it’s a good thing the ad wasn’t for suppositories.
That’s got to be the understatement of the year–“…it’s a little unsanitary, perhaps.” The whole idea is disgusting, even apart from the hygiene/lawsuit aspects. How can a product’s taste come through without the influence of the chemicals in the ink and the paper? How can it possibly come even close to the way the actual product would taste? Absolutely, totally disgusting and more fool Welch’s or anyone else who thinks that this will sell more than it will alienate.
This idea is already a great success. Brand placement in the minds of consumers.
Keep consumers talking and thinking about the product and brand. Why wait to see what the magazine ad might taste like? Yes, the consumer would be better off to purchase the product than risk licking a magazine ad.
Just send out your retail reps to give out samples or hire a third party marketing company to conduct sampling.
Even though it’s sealed, it sounds gross. Have fun licking a splotch on a dusty mag and then closing it after. Stickyyyyyy
More Discussions
Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?OpenAI Names the Infrastructure Standard for Agentic Commerce
Will OpenAI or Google (or another entity) set the gold standard for agentic commerce?Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?
Lickable ads are a bad idea. Even though a person can tell if the strip has been opened already, this does not stop a child or an adult with poor decision-making skills from “re-licking.” It is definitely a lawsuit waiting to happen when the first child gets sick after licking an ad that their classmate or sibling with the flu already licked.
Plus, the very idea of licking a magazine is not appealing. I would not want my brand associated with this practice. True sampling is the way to get the flavor of a product into a customers’ mouth.
Funniest quote on RetailWire today: “…it’s a little unsanitary, perhaps” (Greg Castronuovo, VP of Initiative). Face it: lickable ads are no more disgusting than most advertising, just “a little unsanitary, perhaps.” Next time you see a child drop her ice cream cone on the ground, you can tell her it’s “just a little unsanitary, perhaps.”
Why not make a billboard lickable too? Who is going to really lick the ad? A kid maybe? Then when the kid gets sick they can blame the ad…I agree: it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Next time Welch’s wants to try sampling a new taste, maybe they could try a fruit roll-up type give-away. Individually wrapped candies as a give-away at cash registers could get a lot of penetration closer to the point of sale.
I have had this ad on my desk for over a week, showing it to everyone and getting reactions. First of all, most moms I work with said “Ewww, gross” or something close to it when they read the headline. But in reality, once you pull off the insert, it really is a taste strip, which is a concept that is way more appealing to consumers overall. In fact, lots of the women I showed it to actually wanted to taste it to see if it really tasted like Welch’s, and it does!
So, perhaps one of the problems is the headline. If the message were delivered as a “taste” offer instead of a “lick” offer, the message would be more effective. That said, there should also be copy to advise the reader that if the “holder” has been opened and the taste strip is still there, they should not consume.
One last comment. The entire ad could have been executed on one page.
I think this will be grounds for a slew of lawsuits. Who can say what manner the magazines are stored once they leave the printers? How can Welch’s make sure the samples are not contaminated or tampered with? I would NEVER lick one!
OK, I’ll begin with the obligatory “ick” but I think much of the fear here is ungrounded. Yes, kids will lick anything (I think that’s been proven by paste-eaters long ago), but are you going to sue an aseptic pack manufacturer for encouraging kids to share Yoo-Hoo at the lunch table? As a lawyer once told us, “You can sue anybody for anything.”
And why is this any less sanitary than any packaged food item? Is grabbing a slice of greasy pepperoni off an un-sneeze-guarded sampling plate at the deli counter more sanitary? (Saw a bunch of customers doing that just the other day.) And then there are, you know, envelopes…anyone ever licked one of those…or received one licked by a flu sufferer? Are we up in arms about those little Typhoid Marys of the stationary category?
In the pantheon of great inventions, I don’t think lickables will upset sliced bread from its exalted pedestal, but do I think people may overcome their initial gag reflex on this idea.
I couldn’t agree more with the comments about lawsuits and questionable judgment. Putting aside those concerns, which all by themselves should have killed this in it’s pre-infancy, I’m struggling to understand the marketing value of the approach.
Can we really see scores of lickable ads in magazines? As a one-off buzz factor tactic, it’s a good idea. Welch’s got some print, some attention, and the PR factor is probably worth ten times the value of the ad. Beyond that…no, this is NOT a new and explosive medium for reaching the consumer. What if your product really didn’t taste that wonderful, but you could make a lickable ad that did? Is that false advertising? When taste is subjective?
This is silly.
Budweiser has an ad on the web where a guy spills his Bud on a laddie magazine. Rather than waste the beer he licks it off as his girl friend walks in the door. Her look tells the future of lickable ads for most consumer products.
“A little unsanitary, perhaps.” ????? A LITTLE unsanitary?
This has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen come out of the advertising industry and I’ve been watching dumb and outlandish things come out of there for over fifty years now.
The marketing idea has very good potential, but the marketing execution is questionable. I agree with Anne Howe that the way the message was delivered is a problem. Just reading the main copy: “For a TASTY fact, remove & LICK.” is not appealing at all. What tasty fact? And you have to lick the page? Based on the majority of comments the idea of having to “lick” something is what is throwing everybody off from this idea. It gives a very unfavorable visual impression.
Alternatively what they could have done for the copy was to approach it by simply stating, “Taste Welch’s right now!” For the tasting part, have a one piece strip similar to the Listerine strips where the consumer can somehow peel it away from the magazine (this removes the saliva on magazine issue), and have a one time “taste” of the product. Having the consumer press their face to a magazine page to “lick” the product is not properly communicating what Welch’s ultimately wants the consumer to do, which is to taste the favor of the product. In addition having a cents-off coupon on the page is another compelling idea so the consumer can just tear the page out–end of story.
I wish the product/marketing companies would have consulted with people from this forum, because I think we could save them a lot time and money.
One more vote here for advertising gross-out award of the year. Sure kids will eat things dropped (the three second rule), but that is not the point. Brand equity is at stake here. Where are the Health & Wellness cops when you need them? Contamination and germs aside, what is this stuff? Wholesome grapes? Not so much.
Hate to go with the crowd, but this is a stunningly bad idea. Potential of lawsuits galore, of course, but also the core idea is flawed. What are the chances that these will taste bad when they get to consumers? What if the consumer had just eaten something that doesn’t well with this? I honestly can’t see how this ends well.
North Americans are phobic about germs–what better way to spread them than through lickable magazines? Our children would be the audience that MIGHT actually lick a magazine (I can’t see me doing that, regardless of the flavour).
After we read our magazines at home, we take them to our fitness center, to be enjoyed by others. A lickable magazine would have pages stuck together (and sticky?), never mind the germs that are floating throughout the magazine as each different person turns the pages with saliva on their fingers. Hmmm…can’t picture it being a big marketing breakthrough….
Lickable ads are probably the grossest thing since smell o vision. Aren’t we trying to stem all these viruses and flus? How is this going to help our already fragile immune systems? If I saw this in a magazine I would not let my girls even touch it–used or not. Gross gross gross. And I do mean gross.
I think this is a GREAT idea! Anything that can engage the consumer is going to create a positive ROI. The concept of “tryvertising” continues to gain acceptance in the marketplace, and if Welch’s can get people to taste their product from an ad, and engage another one of the consumer’s senses, they will be way ahead of the game. More CPG companies will be using this technology. Great use of technology married with creative.
Oh my…who would do this? Amazing that someone sold Welch’s on this idea.
This may be a sad commentary on life in America, but doesn’t this just sound like a lawsuit waiting to happen?
I checked with my kids, and they loved they idea!
It’s definitely worth trying. Just make sure it’s truly a one-time seal so that my kids don’t pass their germs around.
Once again it seems that a lack of innovative ideas that could be built around a brand’s core message has resulted in a desperate grasp at some unconventional tactics.
I cannot imagine anyone actually wanting to lick a piece of paper, much less getting excited about the taste enough to want to purchase the product.
I suppose it’s a good thing the ad wasn’t for suppositories.
That’s got to be the understatement of the year–“…it’s a little unsanitary, perhaps.” The whole idea is disgusting, even apart from the hygiene/lawsuit aspects. How can a product’s taste come through without the influence of the chemicals in the ink and the paper? How can it possibly come even close to the way the actual product would taste? Absolutely, totally disgusting and more fool Welch’s or anyone else who thinks that this will sell more than it will alienate.
This idea is already a great success. Brand placement in the minds of consumers.
Keep consumers talking and thinking about the product and brand. Why wait to see what the magazine ad might taste like? Yes, the consumer would be better off to purchase the product than risk licking a magazine ad.
Just send out your retail reps to give out samples or hire a third party marketing company to conduct sampling.
Even though it’s sealed, it sounds gross. Have fun licking a splotch on a dusty mag and then closing it after. Stickyyyyyy