I love clever advertising, so I've been really enjoying Verizon's "There's a map for that" commercials, which poke fun at Apple's "There's an app for that" ads for the iPhone, along with AT&T's spotty 3G coverage. But instead of firing back with some likewise savvy advertising, AT&T is suing Verizon for "misleading" consumers about its coverage, according to DailyFinance.
The argument is that the sparse-looking coverage map Verizon ads attribute to AT&T makes it seem like all of AT&T's coverage is that spotty, when really it's just their 3G network. DailyFinance asserts, and I agree, that this lawsuit is only drawing more attention to AT&T's flaws, while also painting the company as rather petty. And AT&T is pretty much saying that consumers are too stupid to understand Verizon ads—probably not the best move.
Also, Wired reports that AT&T has modified its lawsuit to include a request that the offending advertisements be pulled. But with the holiday season rapidly closing in, I think AT&T's time would be better spent developing some snappy ads of its own—or, um, improving 3G coverage.
But I mean, advertising rivalries are so fun. I can remember the witty Visa commercials of my childhood, which always managed to cram in "They don't take American Express" at the most surprising moment—then again, I was a kid. And the Mac vs. PC ads have been great to follow, from the initial criticism that John Hodgman (the PC) was too sympathetic to Microsoft's "I'm a PC" ads.
Even though I've been lusting over the iPhone since it came out, I've been impressed by Verizon's new ad campaign, which flaunts the network's strength (coverage) while downplaying its primary weakness (no iPhone). And coverage is going to become an ever-important distinction, as Verizon's new Droid smart phone offers much of the same functionality as an iPhone.
Advertising in one of the most mainstream outlets for creativity, and it's disheartening to see AT&T attempt to throw a wrench in the system, especially for ads that weren't really misleading in the first place. But then what do I care? I have Sprint.
Is this lawsuit frivolous or justified? What do you think about advertising rivalries?
How is that "clever" advertising? More like mud slinging. With the exception of Super Bowl ads, I think advertising is partially to blame for the over consumption problem in this country. Nothing annoys me more than "Mac vs PC" ads. Everyone, and everything, including me, is full of shit - I conclude.
i <3 verizon. i want an iphone, but i would never switch to at&t.
Well, I don't use 3G at all, but I actually looked up maps of 3G coverage, and in all the maps, where I live, I get full 3G coverage. So if I had the money, I would definitely get an iPhone, since I'm already on AT&T. But maybe Verizon legitimately DOES have better 3G coverage, and that's why, instead of making an ad poking fun back at Verizon, or showing why they're better, they're suing them.
what a pussy thing to do. at&t are a bunch of crooks, somebody should have poked fun of at them earlier.
AT&T is not the best.
It's advertising and they should make a good come back commercial. I agree that the Mac & PC commercials are great. The iphone is the greatest thing though... I don't think any phone can come even close... Maybe I'm just biased though. Seriously though..the App store? You can't beat that.
I agree - it is clever advertising.
And I have to admit: I've been waiting for this! LOL
As an AT&T customer, and someone who's been to places where there's no 3G coverage, I can honestly say that they still have amazing coverage, just as fast, even though it's not called 3G.
I was in Denver, one of the places AT&T didn't have 3G coverage and didn't notice any difference in my phone or its speed. And Verizon charges too much for me. I'm okay with not being accessible in certain basements or buildings b/c frankly I like my "you can't reach me" time.
I love my verizon coverage and phone. Will never go to AT&T again! Plus, I can talk to my boyfriend for overa thousand minutes a month and not get charged b/c it's MOBILE-TO-MOBILE ;)
@tigerdauphin@xanga - I agree! I have t-mobile and it's much cheaper and sure, I don't have service and bits and pieces, but it's nice! nice to have time where I don't have people ringing my phone constantly! but when I do get back into service area i have people ringing my phone thinking that I died! But when I had verizon, they did charge an arm and a leg for their service! which I though was ridiculous! I paid 180 a month for a 1400 minutes and unlimited text, and supposed data packages! But with t-mobile i only pay 69 dollars for Unlimited everything!!!!
Mmmm... My plan with Verizon ends this spring so I'm considering the iPhone. I'm not too crazy about the cost of the Verizon plan and would love a change. I've been with Verizon for almost 6 years and their phones worked great in my high school, a big cement block, whereas AT&T, Sprint, and T-mobile did not get service.
Advertising rivalries keep things interesting. However, I think this lawsuit is frivolous. And in the long run, no matter the outcome, I think AT&T is not doing itself any favors as far as current customers or with gaining new or return customers.
Although I'm not a fan of AT&T, either, I think that commercial is actually really lame. Okay, so there's a map that you can look at that shows your coverage. That's it? All I get is a map?
I do think this lawsuit is making AT&T look worse. I mean, as a consumer and AT&T customer, I can clearly hear on my tv when it says "3G coverage" and not just "coverage". I mean, anybody who has AT&T knows there is more regular coverage than what that map shows. Oh well, let them be babies. =P
Verizon never said that AT&T's coverage was crap, they've always picked at their 3G coverage. Like on the christmas commercial where the elves are packing the presents. One says "Good luck browsing the internet on that one." Not, "Good luck trying to call and text and use the internet." AT&T should be improving their 3G instead of complaining.
Thats so funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen worse competitor criticism on a commercial than that.
ugh i hate AT&T. that's why i switched to verizon when they bought out cingular. the only thing that kind of irks me about the verizon ads is that they're poking fun at Apple with the "there's a map for that" phrase. but it's AT&T that has the coverage issue, not the iPhone (i'm an iPod touch and a mac user so i get a little offensive lol). anyway, even though i don't like AT&T, it wouldn't change my mind either way that they're being huge babies about the whole thing and sueing versizon is a little extreme. (and just to be fair, verizon isn't that great either. i never have service).
working retail (and dealing with sale questions daily), i can say that not a lot of people actually READ ads and sale signs. if they do, they don't read it carefully and focus on the biggest boldest print. while at&t prolly has grounds to sue, they really should get over it and at the most issue an ad that states their regular coverage map.
Eeeek. Really AT&T? Is Verizon lying? I'm still getting an iPhone, though. If Verizon got the iPhone, I'd def switch to them, though. With Verizon now, & I get service practically everywhere.
VERIZON FOREVER <3.
It's a legitimate ad - AT&T admits that their 3G coverage is that shitty. How is a court even LOOKING at this case? Lol. AT&T just got a hair up their ass cause Verizon called them out.
I actually really like this ad, especially since it's true! Att's coverage sucks, I never had service at school with att, now that we've switched to verizon I get service basically everywhere :D
that is such a stupid move... that case shouldnt be open to begin with. it's health competition.
then again, verizon doesn't like cooperating with me.. so i'm gonna have to try atnt. erghs.
Former Verizon Wireless employee here... and before anyone bashes me, note: I said FORMER. :)
Verizon really does have good 3G coverage, and it's more widespread and reliable than AT&T's. This doesn't mean that AT&T sucks -- I wouldn't know personally, since I've never subscribed to them. Verizon's just doing what all major companies do: touting their strong points and competing with their... um, competitors.
I think it's dumb to sue over this. I don't see how AT&T can complain that "all of its coverage" is being attacked, when the Verizon ads clearly boast about 3G. I think AT&T might be realizing that iPhone commercials can only carry them for so long, and is realizing that -- at the end of the day -- coverage will always be more important than the device. 'Cause seriously, a phone can be amazing... but if I can't use services I subscribe to, what good is it doing?
Come on, AT&T. You've got the funds to make vast improvements in the areas you feel attacked in, and obviously your ad agency is just as creative as any other carrier's. Stop whining, and COMPETE.
I'm more concerned with the fact that no matter what company have, if something were to happen to me while I'm visiting Alaska and I need to make a emergency call using my cellular device, I'm pretty much screwed.
Comments (42)
How is that "clever" advertising? More like mud slinging. With the exception of Super Bowl ads, I think advertising is partially to blame for the over consumption problem in this country. Nothing annoys me more than "Mac vs PC" ads. Everyone, and everything, including me, is full of shit - I conclude.
i <3 verizon. i want an iphone, but i would never switch to at&t.
Well, I don't use 3G at all, but I actually looked up maps of 3G coverage, and in all the maps, where I live, I get full 3G coverage. So if I had the money, I would definitely get an iPhone, since I'm already on AT&T. But maybe Verizon legitimately DOES have better 3G coverage, and that's why, instead of making an ad poking fun back at Verizon, or showing why they're better, they're suing them.
what a pussy thing to do. at&t are a bunch of crooks, somebody should have poked fun of at them earlier.
AT&T is not the best.
It's advertising and they should make a good come back commercial. I agree that the Mac & PC commercials are great.The iphone is the greatest thing though... I don't think any phone can come even close... Maybe I'm just biased though. Seriously though..the App store? You can't beat that.
I agree - it is clever advertising.
And I have to admit: I've been waiting for this! LOL
As an AT&T customer, and someone who's been to places where there's no 3G coverage, I can honestly say that they still have amazing coverage, just as fast, even though it's not called 3G.
I was in Denver, one of the places AT&T didn't have 3G coverage and didn't notice any difference in my phone or its speed. And Verizon charges too much for me. I'm okay with not being accessible in certain basements or buildings b/c frankly I like my "you can't reach me" time.
I love my verizon coverage and phone. Will never go to AT&T again! Plus, I can talk to my boyfriend for overa thousand minutes a month and not get charged b/c it's MOBILE-TO-MOBILE ;)
@tigerdauphin@xanga - I agree! I have t-mobile and it's much cheaper and sure, I don't have service and bits and pieces, but it's nice! nice to have time where I don't have people ringing my phone constantly! but when I do get back into service area i have people ringing my phone thinking that I died! But when I had verizon, they did charge an arm and a leg for their service! which I though was ridiculous! I paid 180 a month for a 1400 minutes and unlimited text, and supposed data packages! But with t-mobile i only pay 69 dollars for Unlimited everything!!!!
Mmmm... My plan with Verizon ends this spring so I'm considering the iPhone. I'm not too crazy about the cost of the Verizon plan and would love a change. I've been with Verizon for almost 6 years and their phones worked great in my high school, a big cement block, whereas AT&T, Sprint, and T-mobile did not get service.
@tigerdauphin@xanga - Haha that's true. I love having excuses like that :)
Advertising rivalries keep things interesting. However, I think this lawsuit is frivolous. And in the long run, no matter the outcome, I think AT&T is not doing itself any favors as far as current customers or with gaining new or return customers.
Although I'm not a fan of AT&T, either, I think that commercial is actually really lame. Okay, so there's a map that you can look at that shows your coverage. That's it? All I get is a map?
@tigerdauphin@xanga - Agreed, 100%
I do think this lawsuit is making AT&T look worse. I mean, as a consumer and AT&T customer, I can clearly hear on my tv when it says "3G coverage" and not just "coverage". I mean, anybody who has AT&T knows there is more regular coverage than what that map shows. Oh well, let them be babies. =P
Verizon never said that AT&T's coverage was crap, they've always picked at their 3G coverage. Like on the christmas commercial where the elves are packing the presents. One says "Good luck browsing the internet on that one." Not, "Good luck trying to call and text and use the internet." AT&T should be improving their 3G instead of complaining.
Thats so funny. I'm pretty sure I've seen worse competitor criticism on a commercial than that.
ugh i hate AT&T. that's why i switched to verizon when they bought out cingular. the only thing that kind of irks me about the verizon ads is that they're poking fun at Apple with the "there's a map for that" phrase. but it's AT&T that has the coverage issue, not the iPhone (i'm an iPod touch and a mac user so i get a little offensive lol). anyway, even though i don't like AT&T, it wouldn't change my mind either way that they're being huge babies about the whole thing and sueing versizon is a little extreme. (and just to be fair, verizon isn't that great either. i never have service).
working retail (and dealing with sale questions daily), i can say that not a lot of people actually READ ads and sale signs. if they do, they don't read it carefully and focus on the biggest boldest print. while at&t prolly has grounds to sue, they really should get over it and at the most issue an ad that states their regular coverage map.
Eeeek. Really AT&T? Is Verizon lying?
I'm still getting an iPhone, though.
If Verizon got the iPhone,
I'd def switch to them, though.
With Verizon now,
& I get service practically everywhere.
VERIZON FOREVER <3.
It's a legitimate ad - AT&T admits that their 3G coverage is that shitty. How is a court even LOOKING at this case? Lol. AT&T just got a hair up their ass cause Verizon called them out.
I actually really like this ad, especially since it's true! Att's coverage sucks, I never had service at school with att, now that we've switched to verizon I get service basically everywhere :D
that is such a stupid move... that case shouldnt be open to begin with. it's health competition.
then again, verizon doesn't like cooperating with me.. so i'm gonna have to try atnt. erghs.
Former Verizon Wireless employee here... and before anyone bashes me, note: I said FORMER. :)
Verizon really does have good 3G coverage, and it's more widespread and reliable than AT&T's. This doesn't mean that AT&T sucks -- I wouldn't know personally, since I've never subscribed to them. Verizon's just doing what all major companies do: touting their strong points and competing with their... um, competitors.
I think it's dumb to sue over this. I don't see how AT&T can complain that "all of its coverage" is being attacked, when the Verizon ads clearly boast about 3G. I think AT&T might be realizing that iPhone commercials can only carry them for so long, and is realizing that -- at the end of the day -- coverage will always be more important than the device. 'Cause seriously, a phone can be amazing... but if I can't use services I subscribe to, what good is it doing?
Come on, AT&T. You've got the funds to make vast improvements in the areas you feel attacked in, and obviously your ad agency is just as creative as any other carrier's. Stop whining, and COMPETE.
I'm more concerned with the fact that no matter what company have, if something were to happen to me while I'm visiting Alaska and I need to make a emergency call using my cellular device, I'm pretty much screwed.