In choosing a service company, would you be more persuaded by (a) the experiences of its satisfied (and successful) customers or (b) the company's boastful self-descriptions? A campaign for Chase's business-to-business operation doesn't forsake all boasting, but it shrewdly gives top billing to some businesses that have profited from the bank's assistance. "In 1943, Louis Zabar's careful scrutiny helped him select the best caviar, smoked fish and commercial bank," says the headline here. Body copy goes on to explain that "from their day-to-day cash handling to business leasing, Chase helps make more of every choice they face." Other ads in the series take a similar approach as they tell of Chase's work for Maui Jim sunglasses and Love's Travel Stops and Country Stores. It's not just that the ads give a sense of how Chase helps some real-life customers, though that's important. By focusing primarily on clients, the campaign tacitly concedes that the companies Chase serves may be more interesting than Chase itself - a view likely to be shared (and appreciated) by potential clients of the bank. Note that this is different from false humility. Chase isn't saying, "We live only to serve you, master!" which is the bootlicking gist of many service-company ads. Rather, we see that Chase understands its own success to be contingent on that of its clients. If they flop, their bank flops with them. Since the Chase clients in the ads all seem to be thriving, we readily believe that Chase has proved itself a useful partner for them - and could do the same for our own enterprises.