does the LNER TV ad aim for market growth or market share?

With most ad campaigns you are either looking at a market share or market growth approach. 

If you're the dominant player you want to grow the market as a whole (as you'll benefit the most from any increase) but if you're not you'll want to get a bigger piece of the overall pie. In basic terms, you have to pinch business from a competitor by saying why your product is better.

With the majority of train operators having a monopoly on their route, competition doesn't necessarily come from another operator but from other modes of transport alongside an unwillingness to travel in the first place.

It's ironic that LNER runs on one of the few routes where, for some of it at least, customers have a choice of operator who they can make their journey with.

So has the ad gone for market share or market growth? I actually think it's somewhere in the middle, which probably isn't where the operator wants to be.



It's well produced, and the voiceover reveal is a tidy little touch. It's well styled with a 'nice' execution but it lacks a bit of ooompphh for me. Impact-wise, if you remember it (the second objective after making it interesting enough to watch in the first place), I think you'd remember it as 'the train ad' rather than 'the LNER ad' - siding with the market growth approach.

Overall I think it could benefit from something a bit more concrete to encourage train travel/modal shift or perhaps a stronger brand presence to make it more LNER.

A solid six travelcards out of 10.

Comments