In a survey of more than 1,600 US consumers about their pre-and post-Super Bowl LVII shopping habits, Veylinx found that women drove the overall increase in consumer demands at 21%, and men only spurred a 1% increase in demand growth for the brands surveyed, including Hellmann’s Mayo, Heineken 0.0%, Frito-Lay PopCorners, Pringles, and Pepsi Zero Sugar.
Per age demographics, Gen Z watchers between the age of 18-25 were “largely unimpressed,” and the group saw a 1% decrease in product demand, Veylinx found.
In terms of the brands that saw the largest increases in demand, Veylinx found that Pepsi Zero Sugar demand increased by 18%, Frito-Lay PopCorners by 12%, and Heineken 0.0% by 11%. These numbers were higher among women, with Pepsi Zero Sugar seeing a 45% increase in demand and Heineken 0.0% by 40%.
But is the expense worth it?
However, given the hefty price of advertising at the Super Bowl, the question remains: Is it ultimately worth it for brands?
Veylinx founder and CEO Anouar El Haji said, “It's not really a surprise to see that Super Bowl ads improve sales, but the short-term bump alone may not be enough to justify the $7 million price tag.”
This is further complicated by the fact that Veylinx found that non-advertisers also exhibited a slight increase in demand post-Super Bowl. Brands in the control group, which included Budweiser Zero, Popchips, Coke Zero Sugar, Kraft Mayo, and Lay’s STAX, saw demand grow by 4.2%, with Kraft Mayo and Lay’s STAX being two of the “greatest beneficiaries."
“It’s possible that the non-advertisers deployed other marketing efforts to offset or take advantage of the Super Bowl advertising — or they simply benefited from increased exposure for their categories,” El Haji said.