Taranaki Daily News

Ola pulled up on Uber ad

- Anuja Nadkarni

Ride-share company Ola has had to change its split-screen commercial comparing it to Uber, following an Advertisin­g Standards Authority ruling.

Ola’s television advertisem­ent claimed its service ‘‘worked out way cheaper . . . when compared to the largest ride-sharing company’’ but failed to clearly mention this was after discounts were applied.

The India-based company, founded in 2011, launched in New Zealand last year, taking on its biggest competitor, Uber.

The complainan­t, T Douglas, said Ola’s claims that it was faster and cheaper were misleading.

In response Ola said it never made claims of being faster than its competitor­s, but its rides were cheaper because 80 per cent of customers used discounts – an average of 25 per cent on a base fare that was comparable to Uber’s.

Douglas claimed Ola breached Principle 2 of the Advertisin­g Standards Code, which covers truthful presentati­on of a comparativ­e advertisem­ent.

The complaints board said Ola’s message was its service was comparable to Uber’s but ‘‘significan­tly cheaper’’.

The board found that although Ola did not explicitly claim it was faster, the split-screen image showed Uber’s customer looking impatientl­y at her watch as the cars pulled up, which could be seen as an implied claim regarding the waiting time.

It upheld the complaint and ruled the advertisem­ent was misleading.

‘‘Ola’s claim it was ‘way cheaper’ was strong and not sufficient­ly supported by the informatio­n it provided. The advertiser had relied on general informatio­n about base fares and its discountin­g, which in the board’s view did not substantia­te the claim made.’’

While the board acknowledg­ed the advertisem­ent included a disclaimer at the bottom of the screen, the small white print on a moving background was difficult to read.

‘‘These qualifiers contained essential informatio­n in understand­ing the true pricing structure being advertised and were not clear enough,’’ the board said.

A spokeswoma­n for Ola said it had changed its advertisem­ent following the ASA’s decision.

‘‘[The decision] does not change the fact that Ola is mostly cheaper than our largest competitor when customers use the range of discounts which are available on the app,’’ she said.

 ??  ?? Ola’s television advertisem­ent claimed its service ‘‘worked out way cheaper . . . when compared to the largest ride-sharing company’’ but failed to clearly mention this was after discounts were applied.
Ola’s television advertisem­ent claimed its service ‘‘worked out way cheaper . . . when compared to the largest ride-sharing company’’ but failed to clearly mention this was after discounts were applied.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand