Hardly anyone is rethinking the brand positioning built on top of the old appetite.
GLP-1s are surging ahead
While legacy brands rehearse last year’s dance moves, the GLP-1 brands are playing offense. Ro’s CEO published a 5,000-word manifesto breaking down the economics of a Super Bowl buy. Hims & Hers is escalating its attack on Big Pharma’s pricing. Novo Nordisk, making its first Super Bowl appearance ever, is countering with “Check Before You Inject,” and a roster of celebrities. This is category warfare on America’s biggest stage, and only one side seems to know the fight has started.
We’re now in an unprecedented marketing moment
We’re witnessing what marketing looks like when disruption happens in real time, occupying the same screen and cultural moment. The Super Bowl has always been a snapshot of American consumption. This year, it’s an inflection point between consumption’s past and its future.
Traditional categories that built the Super Bowl advertising industrial complex, beer, fast food, snacks, share airtime with the very medications that diminish their consumer base. Both believe the Super Bowl is the right place to make their case and are spending accordingly.
Both can’t be right.
Brands need to decide whether they’re building creative systems to adapt to this new reality, or whether they’re buying one more year of nostalgia before the math becomes undeniable. Agencies need to figure out if they’re helping clients see around corners or just reassuring them about the view from where they’re standing.
The Appetite Paradox isn’t just about Super Bowl commercials. It’s a stress test for an industry that has excelled at celebrating unchecked consumption rather than anticipating its decline. On February 8, we’ll see which brands are ready for the conversation and which are still hoping nobody changes the channel.
