Not only does the ad fail to make any inroads to promote the industry and our story, it furthers the myth about our industry being composed of scum.
Maybe Unregistry or Name.com will get it right in next year's Super Bowl. Lord knows there's an untapped hidden end user gold mine for whoever does and that can have far-reaching positive impact for everyone reading this right now.
The first years of ads were designed to get the monkey off Parson's back and get a sucker to make him billionaire from a drunken, gambling-addicted, unsustainable domainer-rich balance sheet.
According to Business Insider, "Daddy was a private, controversial company for a long time. Its former CEO videotaped himself killing an elephant. It supported SOPA, the bill that everyone on the Internet hated. And then there's those Super Bowl ads featuring Danica Patrick and top heavy ladies."
"That's probably changing now. Not just because of Irving. Go Daddy was sold for $2 billion to an investment group last year. That investment group will either want to take Go Daddy public or sell it for more than $2 billion to someone else."
See their goal is pump and dumb. They could care less about creating long-term customer value. Any competitor can step up to the plate right now and eat their lunch.
KKR: Fire Irving's just-hired ass first thing Monday and get that announcement on the Today show. Why even hire someone coming from two loser companies? You are living on borrowed time unless you do. And the press only describes Irving as "Former Yahoo and Microsoft executive Blake Irving has been named CEO of controversial web hosting company Go Daddy."
Controversial hosting sounds like an escort service.
I repeat I wear my GoDaddy T-Shirt to the dog park every day and after 10 years of Super Bowl ads everyone asks me "what's a GoDaddy?" I ask them if they own a small business and how they got their domain. Bingo- they never knew they didn't have to settle for ricksflowers345.biz.
NY Times coverage
Here's the buzz from Twitter: