July 2, 2010
(Was it ever gone?)
It seems people are beginning to change their tune on the demise of TV advertising. According to a June article in Advertising Age, auto advertisers are back and apparently they have brought some new advertisers with them, “charging in and sucking up all the available inventory.”
“I think there might be a re-examination of television,” Ed Atorino, a media analyst at Benchmark Co. told the magazine.
Apparently this re-examination has uncovered the value of targeting a large-scale television audience that can’t be found elsewhere. For the many advertisers who still rely on the masses to keep their doors open, the need still exists to reach lots of people – cost efficiently. A feat that remains hard to accomplish exclusively with digital-savvy customers who hop along a myriad of websites, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages.
TV may look dowdy compared to a lot of the new technology taking center stage, but its intrinsic power has proven hard to beat.
Two new studies add more proof that TV advertising is challenging today’s popular wisdom. Pricewaterhouse Coopers projects ad spending on total U.S. TV will grow to 80.3 billion in 2014 from 62.1 billion in 2009, surpassing its previous high in 2006 of nearly $70 billion. Meanwhile, Interpublic Groups Magna Global media research unit sees TV’s share of total media dollars growing to 36.8% in 2015 from 35.9% in 2009.
TV still has it challenges ahead, but for now, when it comes to reach and impact – it still remains the only game in town.
June 21, 2010
Even while new devices like the iPad continue to drive simultaneous usage (people watching TV while they are online) there appears to be very little difference between people’s online usage habits when they’re watching TV and when they are not.
According to a new J.D. Power Study, people who use their computers while they watch TV tend to be doing the same things online as people who are not watching TV at the same time: email, chatting, shopping, etc.
Simultaneous use is a growing phenomenon: Nearly 40% of people use TV and the web simultaneously each week.
This means that your TV commercials have to work harder than ever before. For the first time, sound may take precedence over sight when engaging the consumer and ultimately determining a campaign’s success or failure.
Web-tasking consumers are simply ignoring commercials that don’t possess an audio hook. Do your company’s TV commercials have what it takes to get this ever growing segment to look up from their iPads and laptops? Or do your commercials sound like every other commercial in the break? How is your ad agency addressing this issue?
The time where visuals alone could carry the day is gone forever. Without the right audio strategy, your message could be falling on deaf ears.
April 29, 2010
That’s exactly what I want to tell advertisers who continually complain about how television has lost its effectiveness.
You won’t see Progressive Insurance complaining. The company recently blew away analysts’ expectations with a 27% jump in quarterly profit. They also noted the fifth straight quarter in which their auto policy counts have been up.
It appears the television commercials featuring “Flo” are winning over more than a few new customers for Progressive. The quirky cashier’s appeal is grabbing market share faster than she can fire off another zinger.
Now back to the problem with TV advertising?
It’s pretty basic. It always has been. Engage viewers with something compelling, add in a relevant, unique selling message and stay consistent with it. And most of all, keep an open mind.
How many Insurance company executives would have thrown their agency out the front door if they presented them with commercials featuring a talking gecko … or a bunch of cavemen stuck in the ‘80s … or a sarcastic cashier sporting a tricked-out name tag with “Flo” emblazoned on it?
What would your reaction be?
Remember, pedestrian creative produces pedestrian results.
TV will continue to deliver excellent ROI, but only for those retailers willing to step out of their comfort zones.
April 20, 2010
After 27 years in the advertising business, I have been exposed to all kinds of propaganda, and I’m sure I have been guilty of propagating some myself. But, I have always tried to base mine on logic. So when I hear the social media people tell me that television is fast becoming a thing of the past, I must question the logic in which they base this claim.
Are they unaware that in 2009 the average American home had 2.86 TV sets; 18% higher than 2000 and 40% higher than in 1990?
Or that Americans spent over 36 hours a week watching TV last year compared to 4-hours a week using the Internet?
Perhaps they also forgot that 35% of all advertising dollars will be directed to TV advertising in 2010.
Even if they were aware of these facts, I’m sure it remains a mystery to them “why” television remains so popular.
So, let me clear up this mystery as succinctly as possible. Consumers continue to purchase TV sets, at a record pace, because they simply enjoy watching what’s on them. It’s passive entertainment. It requires them to do absolutely nothing, but switch it on. A comforting concept in today’s overly active world.
TV receives 35 cents of every ad dollar spent because it works for its advertisers. Despite the debate over Push vs. Pull marketing; there’s apparently more than enough consumers who are still happy to be “pushed” into stores all across America.
While building online communities, cultivating dialog and adding twitter followers may eventually pay dividends.
TV pays those dividends NOW.
And from a retailer’s standpoint, coming off the worst recession in 70 years, I can’t think of a better reason “why.”
Source: Nielsen Television Audience Report, 2009
April 14, 2010
While many Madison Avenue executives are slobbering praise over Nike’s latest controversial commercial featuring a somber Tiger Woods as he is reprimanded by the voice of his deceased father – main street America’s is responding much differently.
An online poll of 600 Americans by Flemington-based HCD Research shows that the favorable opinion of the Nike Brand dropped from 92% to 79% after watching the commercial. With 29% of the viewers saying they were less likely to buy products endorsed by Woods after viewing the creepy commercial.
I’m not surprised with these poll results. It is Nike’s pathetic attempt to capitalize on the reprehensible behavior of another athlete pitch man gone bad.
A Nike spokesman, reading from a statement, said “The ad addresses his (Tigers) time away from the game, using the powerful words of his father.” Really?
He neglected to say that those “powerful words” were carefully taken out of context from a 2004 interview that had absolutely nothing to do with the current situation.
A well-crafted, edgy commercial … too bad it didn’t fool the people who really count – the consumers.
After a series of controversial commercials over the years, I think Nike may come to regret this one. I know I have.
January 8, 2010
The 2009 holiday season didn’t produce many good or effective TV commercials. But, there were a few standouts.
Below are 4 of my favorites (other than my clients, of course):
(one of the few recycled commercials that is memorable)