What is direct comparative advertising?
If you’ve ever seen a Pepsi commercial that takes a direct jab at Coca-Cola, or a Burger King ad mocking McDonald’s, you’ve witnessed the unfiltered battleground of U.S. advertising. In America, companies are legally allowed to mention and even criticise their competitors by name in what is known as comparative advertising. This approach has led to some of the most iconic and entertaining marketing feuds, where brands openly battle for consumer attention through bold claims, humor, and even outright shade. Whether it’s Apple taking digs at Microsoft or Verizon comparing its network coverage to AT&T, American advertising thrives on direct competition.
South Africa, however, plays by a different rulebook. Here, direct comparative advertising is heavily restricted. The Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) enforces strict guidelines to ensure fair competition and prevent misleading claims. Brands cannot openly name, attack, or belittle their competitors in advertisements. Instead, companies must be more subtle, relying on clever wordplay, color schemes, or indirect references to make their point.
This difference has led to a fascinating contrast in advertising styles. In the U.S., a brand can say, “Our product is better than Brand X—here’s why.” In South Africa, that same message would have to be conveyed more creatively, perhaps with a tagline like, “Some companies make promises. We deliver results.” While the implication is clear, the competitor’s name is never mentioned, making the message legally acceptable while still engaging audiences in a brand battle.
Nowhere is this dynamic more evident than in South Africa’s insurance industry. Unable to call each other out directly, major insurance companies engage in an ongoing billboard war—subtly taking shots at one another with clever wording and playful imagery. It’s an art form in itself, forcing marketers to be more strategic, and consumers to play detective in deciphering which brand is being targeted.
Where did the advertising battle begin?
The surge in competitive billboard advertising among South African insurance companies didn’t happen overnight. It began with two disruptors: Naked Insurance and Pineapple Insurance. These companies broke away from the traditional insurance marketing playbook and introduced bold, innovative advertising campaigns that would eventually spark a wave of outdoor brand battles.
From the start, Naked and Pineapple adopted very different approaches to capturing market share. Naked Insurance positioned itself as the ultimate convenience-driven insurer, appealing to a modern consumer base that despises unnecessary delays, paperwork, and impersonal call centers. Their campaign launched with a strikingly simple but clever slogan: “Lose Wait.” It was plastered across billboards in every major city, instantly making an impression. The message was clear—getting insured with Naked meant no more waiting in long queues, no endless phone calls, and no dealing with pushy sales agents. The ad didn’t just sell insurance; it sold freedom from the frustrations that had plagued the industry for decades.
Pineapple, on the other hand, took a completely different route. Instead of emphasizing efficiency and convenience, Pineapple Insurance leaned heavily into millennial culture. They understood their audience: a generation that grew up on the internet, communicates through memes, and values authenticity in the brands they support. Pineapple’s campaigns featured humorous, relatable references to office burnout, Monday blues, and nostalgic callbacks to “simpler times”—themes that strongly resonated with South Africa’s younger, digitally-savvy workforce. By positioning itself as the insurance brand that “gets” millennials, Pineapple cleverly built an emotional connection with its audience, making insurance feel less like a necessary evil and more like an accessible, community-driven service.
These contrasting strategies marked the beginning of South Africa’s modern billboard advertising war. While Naked aimed to dismantle traditional frustrations with insurance, Pineapple focused on cultural relatability and digital-first engagement. This rivalry wasn’t just about selling policies—it was about redefining how insurance companies market themselves in a digital age. Their success signaled to other insurance brands that outdoor advertising could be used in new, unconventional ways, leading to a rush for billboard dominance that currently is currently raging on.
When the Billboard Battle Got… Interesting
What started as a creative and competitive push for market dominance between Naked Insurance and Pineapple Insurance soon turned into an all-out advertising war. Other insurance companies, eager to claim their slice of the pie, realized that simply promoting their own services wouldn’t be enough. The market had already been disrupted—now, the only way to truly stand out was to go after the competition.
This shift in strategy meant brands had to toe the fine line set by the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB), which strictly prohibits direct comparative advertising. The challenge? How do you take a jab at a competitor without actually naming them? Enter King Price Insurance, a brand known for its playful and unconventional marketing.
King Price decided to take on OUTsurance, one of South Africa’s most dominant insurance brands, by subtly—but unmistakably—mocking their name. The company put up billboards in Pretoria declaring that “Pretoria is Out”, with the word “Out” placed inside a full green circle, resembling the OUTsurance logo. Just below, the slogan continued: “The King is In.” The message was bold, cheeky, and impossible to ignore. It was a clear shot at OUTsurance, signaling that King Price was here to dethrone the established players in the industry.
But the most audacious move in the billboard battle came not from King Price, Naked, or Pineapple. It came from Firebird Insurance, a newcomer to the game looking to make a massive first impression. Rather than picking a side, Firebird decided to take on both Naked and Pineapple in a single advertisement.
Their strategy? A billboard placed on one of Johannesburg’s busiest sections of the N1 featuring a hilariously awkward image of a very embarrassed naked pineapple, accompanied by the simple but cutting question: “Who’s got you covered?” In one fell swoop, Firebird managed to reference both Naked and Pineapple without explicitly naming them—staying within legal advertising boundaries while making a clear, direct attack.
@life.with.zee_ Replying to @Forever Ella THE EVEN CALLED ME OUT ON THE INTERWEBS 😱😱😱😱 I am in shock!!!!! #fyp #southafrica #marketing #pineapple
♬ original sound – Zandri Van Zyl
@brendenr22 Who is Firebird?🧐 #tiktoksouthafrica #southafrica #southafricatiktok #firebird #firebirdbillboard #comment
♬ original sound – Brenden Roberts🇿🇦
This moment marked a shift in the billboard war. No longer was the focus solely on differentiating through clever marketing—insurance brands were now openly taking aim at each other, using subtle references, humor, and just enough ambiguity to push the limits of what South Africa’s advertising laws would allow. And if history is any indication, the battle is far from over.
Where do we go from here?
If it weren’t for the initial scuffle between Naked and Pineapple, we’d probably still be stuck with the same uninspired, predictable insurance ads that have filled South African highways for decades. Instead, what we have now is an outdoor advertising landscape that is bold, engaging, and, frankly, hilarious. Seeing insurance companies subtly—and sometimes not so subtly—go after each other makes my daily commute far more entertaining.
For years, I envied America’s direct comparative advertising laws. Watching brands openly mock each other on television, calling out their competitors by name, and turning every ad campaign into a public showdown always seemed like a marketing dream. I thought we were missing out. But now? I actually think we have it better.
Our advertising restrictions force copywriters and marketers to think harder, to be more clever, and to push boundaries without stepping over the line. Direct comparison advertising is easy—it’s lazy. There’s no finesse in simply naming your competitor and pointing out their flaws. It’s the advertising equivalent of taking a shortcut.
The moment I realized this was when BMW fired back at Mercedes-Benz after their famous “durability test” ad. Mercedes had proudly shown off one of their cars skidding off the road, tumbling down a sheer cliff, and somehow surviving the fall intact. BMW’s response? A simple billboard with the words: “Beat the Bends.” It was subtle, smart, and devastatingly effective. That’s the kind of advertising brilliance that only exists in a space where direct attacks aren’t allowed.
South African advertising might have rules, but those rules force brands to be better, sharper, and more creative. And honestly? I wouldn’t have it any other way.
