Go Daddy – Contest Winner Announcement

Tough decision on the Go Daddy competition. There were some really, really great entries. I don’t think we’ve ever had a contest where we’ve laughed as much at the entries.

The entries were all over the board. Many users riffed on Go Daddy’s tried and true voluptuous chicks theme- most used a decidedly tongue-in-cheek parody format. Other ads took a different angle, with most filmmakers aiming at the old funny bone. Some ads were more serious though. They were all good!

At the end of the day, we couldn’t stop talking about, or laughing at lshertzer’s “Super Powers” ad.

We decided to award lshertzer the Prize for the Zooppa’s portion of the Go Daddy contest. Lshertzer’s video made us laugh the most, and we wanted to watch it over and over. It fit with the Go Daddy brief, but took the Go Daddy brand in a fun new direction. Lshertzer’s piece also stood out from the crowd because of its unique approach- simple, clever writing and delivery.

Congrats lshertzer!

Meme E


  1. Congratulations Ishertzer,
    I agree with the judges. Your spot was packed with great one liners. I laughed more during your’s than my one. You are worthy of the prize. Don’t spend it all on one spec. commercial {;-]). I’d like to take a minute and share an additional thought or too.
    Behind the scenes at the VCK I have received several emails from peers who were disappointed with the judges selection for this contest. The overwhelming reason was the perceived low-production values of the spot. While I don’t believe these P.V.’s were low, I do think they were relatively easy to execute than those of other spots. Hey, no foul there. Kudos to Ishertzer. It is something I regularly try to formulate myself to make things easier. Here however is Zooppa’s problem. I sense that Zooppa is trying to increase the pool of upper echelon talent in their stable. If it is perceived that the average Zooppa member need only come up with content ‘simple and one dimensional’ moving forward, it could hurt Zooppa’s end game goal. Maybe in contests like these and some others there should be two categories, both of equal prizeage. Here is an example of how they might be categorized: 1) For best overall / most comedic / best branding. In this category Zooppa could have still made an argument for awarding Ishertzer. The second category being: 2) Most elaborately produced / most comedic / best branding. In this way, it keeps the creatives who are Zooppa members from second guessing themselves as they go into pre-production planning for these contests. After all, as producers we all look at our budgets before starting pre-prod on these contests and try to bring the highest national quality our budget’s can allow. I am fairly sure that Zooppa does not necessarily want to give the message that ‘simpler is better’. By compensating with this two tier award structure ZOOPPA can continue to grow their stable of creatives from a comedic value perspective as well as a visually impressive, cinematically diverse perspective.

    Something to think about. I want to be clear though, except for a dearth of explaining the product itself, I agree that Ishertzer’s spot was the funniest of the bunch, and that includes my own.

    Jared (aka the VCK)

  2. Hey ZooppaStaff,
    I don’t see my comment anymore. Not sure what happened to it. Anyways, yeah, this contest wasn’t one that anyone had to pony up any more PV money than they already had…so in that way it was an easy contest to lose. Not as painful as most. Still I wanted to share some behind the scenes comments circulating among peers. We definitely don’t want Zooppa participants to start dumbing down the projects from a PV standpoint.
    The VCK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *