This post was mentioned on Twitter by malbonster: New blog post for ad agencies who want to create better digital services & apps: “Pulling Off The Optimal Platform Job” http://bit.ly/1RLuYI…

Thanks for the kudos!

You’ve uncovered a treasure trove of videos on YouTube, but to the best of my knowledge none of these ever ran as paid media (at least in the U.S.). The only spot that ever ran as paid media was the Crispin spot developed for Holiday 2007 that showed a character being chased throughout history, then ending up on a boring treadmill. There have been tons of promotional videos created for Nike+ over the years (many of which were featured on NikePlus.com as promotions for the product and also seeded on YouTube), but there was very little “paid” media support. The strategy was heavy on PR and earned media until last year’s Human Race, which was supported with paid media in all of the major race cities around the world. As I said before, we would have loved to have more paid media support, but Nike struggled to develop spots it felt did the product justice (which is why the assignment initially moved from W+K to CP+B in the first place, and then back again).

Edward, R/GA’s model is called “Platforms + Campaigns” — not just platforms. We are strong believers in the power of platforms and the power of campaigns, but when both work together it can transform brands (as we tried to do together during that little pitch last year…). It’s becoming nearly impossible do either solely today.

First of all, let me just say that I think the Nike+ platform, and all the work R/GA have done with Nike, is *brilliant*.

The truly groundbreaking Nike+ platform is cited in nearly every meeting I have been to where people are discussing the future of advertising or what they’d like to do with digital – and this has been the case for three years. So, *in no way* do I seek to take anything away from that.

However, I’m not sure it is correct to say that:

“There was absolutely none [paid-for advertising] for over a year after the product launched in August 2006.”

There are these two from November 2006:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHDw5uQvK5Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEs8NIRRyYc&feature=player_embedded

And there’s this one from December 2006:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHDw5uQvK5Y

And then there are these three from 2007 (before August 2007):
April 2007 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9yn_3fromg
April 2007 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTd2vEkWTj0
July 2007 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WVN6xULZqo

So – that’s six different ads that I found in fifteen minutes on YouTube from the first year. There were a further 3 or 4 plus localised ads in September 2007 – a date that is only relevant because, as you say, there were none for OVER a year…

I really don’t mean to split hairs, but the point that I was trying to make (obviously, not well enough) was that Nike+ *was* supported with traditional paid-for channels – and not just earned media – and that the paid-for support was undoubtedly *relatively* expensive when compared to most people’s budgets for digital platforms… and that this makes a like-for-like comparison difficult.

In summary, I hope you don’t feel that I was in any way detracting from the value that the Nike+ platform has created, its business impact or the significance of R/GA’s innovative model. I totally accept that the platform is the thing that makes what you did work, that drove the earned media attention, and that the value of the earned component is much greater over time. But, traditional advertising played perhaps slightly more of a role than you claim in establishing the platform.