Ashley Swartz is president of Eiko Media, a Detroit-headquartered agency she started three years ago with Craig Daitch. The shop specializes in using emerging technologies and platforms to promote brands. One of Eiko’s areas of expertise is static integration of products in video games–e.g. brokering a deal between video game publisher Ubisoft and Jeep to feature the new Jeep Commander in the next iteration of “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider.”
Eiko, which works with videogame publishers such as Ubisoft and Eidos Interactive, is also exploring opportunities in the dynamic placement arena, which is expected to make inroads in the coming years. (Dynamic placement of ads occurs in networked games, and ads can be replaced in real time.)
Swartz talked to SHOOT about some upcoming projects from Eiko as well as navigating the ad landscape as a technology-based advertising agency looking to bring brands into new ad frontiers.
SHOOT: What are some of your recent projects?
Ashley Swartz: We’re now primarily working with Ubisoft, and Eidos Interactive and a few other folks. One of the integrations is the new Jeep Commander and the Jeep Wrangler [being] featured in the next “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” game. That will launch in March. … We are very active working with the Big Three [automakers] out of Detroit. GM and Chrysler are the largest. We have numerous integrations coming out with those two partners into various titles, in Q1, Q2 and Q3 of next year.
SHOOT: Sounds like you’re pretty busy.
When we first got into this game, we got in before dynamic placement was the talk of the town. We focus primarily on static integration. … The thing with dynamic is that obviously not all games are online and networked, and Sony still isn’t playing in that sandbox. So it’s kind of difficult because you can’t get ubiquitous coverage as far as dynamic goes. And right now, dynamic is simply billboards [etc.], and it really is one dimensional in the sense that it’s billboards, … We’re not at objects yet, we’re not at replacing people’s clothing or things like that.
For us, as far as deals that we do, the static integration obviously has its value. And it’s great because it gives you interaction with the product–you’re driving a vehicle, you’re using a wireless device. It’s something that’s more than just passive integration into a game. One of our ethos as an agency is that new media has to be coupled with traditional media to really be effective. So, once we come to terms on the agreement of the integration, then we as an intermediary agency work with our advertising partners to build out holistic programs.
SHOOT: How do you go about that?
We basically work on behalf of Eidos and Ubisoft in this example. In the area of premium commercial titles, where we’re integrating into a licensed product, we represent the publisher, and from the beginning, we manage the relationship, and sell into the automotive or the brand client. We negotiate the deal, we close the deal, we usually facilitate signing of the agreement, all that stuff. And then once that’s done, we begin dialoguing about the co-marketing opportunities, and how to get the ROI for the brand client. And then the brand client becomes our client in some respects. For example, we’re working on “Tomb Raider,” so we sold in “Tomb Raider” to Jeep, and right now we’re managing the integration and the after market stuff. If there are incremental programs that need to be built out, there’s a possibility that we could do them for Jeep, or somebody else could do them for Jeep. At this point now in some respects we’re working on behalf of Jeep… The challenge for us is making sure there is value created. Because at the end of the day, if ROI and brand value are not created from these new media investments, there’s never going to be repeat business and brands are going to get disenchanted with it.
SHOOT: And do you have a lot of repeat business?
We do. It’s been interesting for us because the first year that we did this, we were out there evangelizing it, and a lot of the brands and their agencies, were like ‘no we’re just not there yet,’ because three years ago they were being paid to have their products in video games.
So, for the first 12 months after Eicko was formed, we struggled. We were relying on other new new technology business. Our core focus, we have a background in wireless, so we started out deploying entertainment applications in wireless, and that’s how we fell into videogames, and we’re also doing some geo-mapping stuff right now. In the beginning, we thought video games would be more of a talking point, and it was after the first 12 months of us going out there and talking about it, that we started to see business actually close, and brands starting to get receptive.
SHOOT: Is this better for some brands than others? Is it right for every brand?
I really believe that the answer to that is a function of the fundamental agility of their organizational structure, specifically with their marketing and advertising group. So, if you’ve never played with new media — some agencies are still talking about branded entertainment being new media or the Internet being new media. And that’s fine, but fundamentally, is that if you always look at new media as an afterthought, and that’s how your organization functions, and your advertising agency functions, I don’t think it’s a worthwhile investment. Why spend the money if it’s an afterthought, and just to be able to wave a flag and say that you’ve done it? I don’t think it’s worthwhile. The problem is that when you don’t look at integrated and traditional media elements, which are essential and a key part of any type of product launch or marketing campaign, if you don’t look at them and how you can leverage them to complement the new media investments whether its wireless or video games, then it’s a worthless spend.
SHOOT: And what about dynamic placement–are you guys in that space?
We are having discussions with numerous dynamic placement organizations about representation, et cetera, but we’re not at a point were we are ready to come out publicly and say who we’re working with. We’ve had discussions with all the players. And its just not there yet. It’s not ubiquitous.
SHOOT: Do you think dynamic placement will be ubiquitous at some point in the near future, or is it a couple of years out?
Unless Sony comes around saying that they’re going to work with the providers, I don’t think so. … [If it winds up] that each platform has a proprietary solution, I don’t think any third party is going to corner the market. So that’s my opinion. I do think that dynamic advertising in video games is real, and I do believe that as the 3-D engines and the object replacement gets more robust, I absolutely think it’s going to be more compelling to advertisers, but I don’t think necessarily one player or one winner is going to come out because if the platforms come up with unique solutions, then it’s going to be splintered.
SHOOT: But it will probably still be a viable business model?
Absolutely, it’s just the issue is that competition is a good thing for the marketplace. Competition is good for the people purchasing the ad real estate, because it’s going to drive price down–but in certain aspects, and this has always been the challenge of technology, the challenge for the individual selling the advertising–it’s not only you have to sell the real estate, you have to sell the technology as well. You have to educate people, and it’s really difficult to sell product while trying to educate your consumer.
SHOOT: Who do you think are the most forward-thinking brands when it comes to this?
I think Daimler Chrysler and General Motors. It’s a little easier for them because they have such big budgets. The beverage purveyors–the Cokes and the Pepsis–again because they have large budgets. I think that the wireless handset manufacturers. … And if you look at dynamic, then the film companies, the Warner Brothers and the Sonys. They were one of the first to jump on board with dynamic ad placement of billboards because they could geographically target and date-specific target a billboard in a videogame. …
It’s challenging being where we are because we’re technologists that are attempting to forward integrate into being marketers, and a lot of times we deal with agencies who are marketers that are trying to backward expand to be technologists and I don’t know necessarily if that always works. And that’s the challenge is that the issue — for us, if there are technological barriers to deploying campaigns, or constraints, that’s new media.