There's so much in the ad to talk about that I'm lost.
Ok. Let's start with the product or service they are selling.
It's Myshield health plan, a medical insurance. But the feature being emphasized here is Cashless hospital admissions. The scenario they have chosen is a sudden medical emergency in the middle of the night.
Let's look at the headline.
"It's a 2am medical emergency. Which is the first place you rush to?"
There are two photos below the headline. One of an ATM machine and the other an ambulance.
As you know, insurance is all about selling the intangibles and emotions. Yet the headline is asking a choice question. Of course, the whole intention is to gel with the copy which talks about the cashless hospital admissions, provided you read further. But asking a choice question based on logic just so that you can logically present your feature or benefit does nothing to help you.
Notice also how you feel when reading the headline. Although not stated, it assumes either you or someone in your family has a case of medical emergency, most probably the latter. But do you feel like you are the one involved? Do you feel attached to it? Does it make you panic? Does it make you want to read further?
Now to the copy.
"Emergencies are no respecters of time. Or empty wallets."
Although it rhymed, starting a sentence that is difficult to read and understand is suicidal. So if emergencies are no respecters of time, does it mean they waste time? Cos when you respect time, you don't waste time.
"At Aviva we believe that in a crisis, people should be rushing to A&Es. Not ATMs."
Noticed how fragmented the sentences are? Aren't they emphasizing rushing to A&Es and not ATMs? So why the two are broken into two sentences? In fact, I read these two sentences as one, until I looked more closely to find that there's a full stop in between A&Es and ATMs. There's also no need to emphasize that there are many A&Es and ATMs.
"A little thing. But something we think you'll appreciate. If ever you had a midnight crisis."
The word "If ever" gives the readers a feeling that it might never happens. And why use "had" which means something has passed.
And the whole advertisement begins with "you" in the headline, then starts with "people" and ends with "you." It talks about you, then everybody and then back to you. There is no consistency.
Reading the copy again, I realized they have made some assumptions as well:
1. The reader has no cash in wallet or not enough cash ("Or empty wallet").
2. There's no other ways of making payment at the hospital except cash.
3. There's no ATM machines in hospitals.
4. Anyone who goes to A&E at night will end up getting admitted to hospital.
The whole copy does not talk about how the feature Cashless hospital admissions benefits a reader, except not having to go to an ATM. And that's not a benefit.
Now let's talk about the photos. It shows a picture of ATM and an ambulance. Since the headline asked "Which is the first place you rush to?", would it be more appropriate to use an A&E sign?
And change the Cashless hospital admissions to Cashless hospital admission, without the "S" in admission.
Little things do matter.
P.S. Nobody likes to be admitted to hospital multiple times.
P.P.S. Let me know if you spotted any other little things that matter.