These ads tell you a few things. First, there’s a change happening in February 2009. Second, if you use an antenna, you need to get a converter box. Third, there’s a government coupon program to help you buy a converter box. But it stops there, encouraging consumers to find out the rest of the information on their own; particularly about the price.

This wouldn’t be so terrible, but lately I’ve seen Comcast running with the ambiguity – no doubt trying to reassure their customers, but definitely fishing for new ones too:

This ad tells me, “What do antenna people have to do? NO CLUE! Thank goodness we have Comcast.” Earlier this week while watching Countdown, I saw another Comcast commercial that was even more ominous, declaring that people who use antennas “have some decisions to make.”

I can’t help but wonder if, considering that cable television is paying for the DTV ads, there’s some sort of behind-the-scenes agreement to structure the ads this way given the target audience. The typical consumer still using rabbit ears is probably not very tech savvy; these commercials leave him/her with a scary converter box and how much does that cost and how do I set it up and oh my gosh scary. Or I can get setup with Comcast and they take care of it for me.

Whereas, in reality, it’s immensely cheaper to get a converter box. According to the DTV2009 website, they only run $50 – $70. And the coupon that you get? It’s for $40. Also, you can get up to two per household. So, potentially, it’s free.

I applaud Best Buy for trying to dispel some of the confusion with this video. But I think more people need to be talking about how inexpensive and easy it is to upgrade to a converter box, so people aren’t unnecessarily lured in by Comcast when they don’t need to be.

So I’m walking out the door today, and as I go to turn off the TV, I see the e*Trade talking baby commercial. Just before I turn it off, I heard something that didn’t jive with what I had heard the 10 times I added the video to my last blog post (yes, I obsess at times).

I step back and play the commercial again, and sure enough: eTrade is now advertising savings accounts that earn six times the national average – down from their initial claim 8x. It turns out that the national average isn’t actually falling; eTrade just couldn’t sustain their initial promise. There aren’t any online videos with this updated version yet, but I’ll be keeping an eye out.

This makes me even less likely to sign up for an account with them. In two more months, will it be four times the national average? Or perhaps they’ll aim for the top of the bell curve. Either way, it won’t be with my money.

I chuckled at first when I saw the message at the bottom about how to take advantage of the offer:

On the one hand, it could simply mean that after I call that number, the upgrade will take hold. All I need to do is use my card.

On the other hand, I haven’t used this card since I got it. Perhaps this is them pleading with me to actually make a purchase so they can start charging me interest. Ah, the joys of cards with no annual fees.

Maybe the ambiguity is all in my head, but I got a kick out of it anyway.

I’m not sure what I think about this new marketing strategy… but I’m curious to see if it will catch on.

Then during the this year’s Superbowl, Wachovia came out with Way2Save, which is the same basic idea, except instead of rounding up the purchase, a full dollar is transfered into your savings account with each purchase. The commercial even ends with the line, “More than just change.”

Oooh, snap.

But is the secret to this marketing strategy simply “more is better?” There’s some interesting Psychology here that I just had to explore.

What strikes me as interesting is that these campaigns really have nothing to do with the quality of the savings accounts! It only addresses getting money into the account in the first place. Even if customers treat this as additional money going into Savings, it could be easily copied without the bank’s interference.

Consider Keep the Change as an example. Say each purchase puts, on average, 50 cents into your savings… multiply that by the number of debit card purchases you have each month, and transfer that amount each month on your own. Easy!

But then again, if I make one debit card purchase per day, that means I transfer $15 each month, and that’s a lot of money. Spare change, on the other hand, is a lot less intimidating.

Wachovia seems to be pulling a Gillette-style power play, suggesting that more is inherently better. Spare change isn’t intimidating, but is an extra dollar? A lot of people round the tip up to the next dollar. I topped my gas tank off to the next dollar until my friend Jason told me that it’s a bad idea. But how many people figure out a tip and then add an extra dollar? Has that tiny increase already crossed the line? I’m interested in your thoughts.

The idea for this post actually came to me when I was at Whole Foods the other day. As I was checking out, the checker informed me that it was “Round Up” day.

They were asking everyone to round their purchase up to the next dollar to help build houses in New Orleans. Aside from being a great cause, it had all the appeal of Keep the Change, plus the fact that it was only a one-time purchase. It was a great way for Whole Foods to get their proverbial foot in the door. I agreed to participate.

Then my purchase was tallied up, and it came to a whopping… $26.97. Wow. Now I feel like the idiot who’s donating three pennies to a worthy cause. So I tell the checker to put in an extra dollar. And when all is said and done, I ended up paying more than other grocery store charity drives that flat out ask me for a dollar. Overall, it seemed like a really effective way to get people involved.

Have you encountered a similar “round up to the nearest dollar” promotion anywhere? What other applications exist for this idea?

First thought: Eww, gross. Second thought: Wait a second. Haven’t I been asked that question before?

Sure enough, almost two years ago, I was horrified at the same ad, only that time the culprit was Yahoo.

There must be billions of possible search queries out there… are we really hurting for original ideas so much that we need to reuse them? And even if we are… do we have to use spiders as the ad to copy? Why can’t we use a less scary query… like “Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens,” or “Why do birds suddenly appear every time you are near?”

In the meantime, my conclusion remains the same – only now, I’m avoiding two search engines for fear of spiders popping up out of nowhere.

Is this a case of having too much space to say something and not knowing what to say? Or do they really think that the majority of their audience will get confused in interpreting the difference between single, double, and triple?

I feel that most fast food restaurants have conditioned us well enough to know the difference by now. However, if we were talking about “quadruple,” the explanation might be warranted. Burger King, for example, had to shorten it to “quad” for their Stacker promotion.

Clearly, quintuple is right out.

My favorite part of that image, though, is the decision to include communication back to the company as part of the overall message. Is this in case the Roll Size Guide confuses us to the point of feeling helpless? I think everyone should call 1-800-553-3639 to communicate their confusion and frustration.

Actually, the correct answer to the question is Flickr. In what must be a new marketing move, I noticed a new, subtle message in the latest Flickr logo:

Flickr and its users, sitting in a tree…

Seriously, though, this is an interesting marketing tactic. Sure you could post your pictures online with Picasa, or Shutterfly, or Zoto, or Zoomr (though Zoomr is confusing – the big link says Discover but the logo says MasterCard). But do any of these sites love you?

Flickr loves you. And that should count for something. And I believe it counts for… being out of beta?

The card was missing any sort of branding! Doesn’t it look naked without it?? A few weeks later as part of my credit card bill, I got what I think was some sort of explanation:

Recently, a mutual business decision ended our affiliation with your association. FIA Card Services will continue to handle your account. We remain steadfast in our commitment to one goal: Satisfying you, our customer.

Wow… ended their affiliation with my association? I realize it’s just saying that they aren’t partnering with my bank anymore, but it sounds a little worse than that. But also I wonder – surely FIA has other sponsors that they could use to brand a credit card… something subtle? Or on the other end of the spectrum, perhaps a Hello Kitty card? Not really subtle, but at least it would be something other than a plain, blank silver card.

I suppose that isn’t as bad as my second card… when I went to pay my bill this month, this is how they listed my account:

Does that remind anyone else of my favorite Futurama episode?

I remember a time in high school when I went to Best Buy just looking for some floppy disks for my parents’ Mac computer. The associate scoffed at me, saying (in a snooty tone), “We don’t carry anything Mac compatible.” My, how the tables have turned…