On Tuesday I was invited, along with some of my colleagues, to Response TV – an event organised by ITV to present some research they had conducted with the DMA to prove that TV advertising makes other media work harder.
Well, I can tell you I went with high hopes that ITV were finally going to acknowledge that DRTV exists. And that it is a good thing.
We arrived at Television Centre and were invited to watch a film. The voice-over stated: “It is widely accepted that TV advertising works by building brand associations over the long term. ... However, the responsiveness of TV campaigns could historically only be estimated by long-term sales figures or post-campaign research. Response was almost impossible to calculate accurately and brand owners would shy away from television”
Right – so I’ll just get my coat then as clearly I have been making up all of those phone calls generated in direct response to a TV ad.
No wait – once again it's simply a case that DRTV doesn't actually seem to exist. The only thing worth talking about seems to be 'Brand' television advertising.
I do get a bit cross at times – DRTV is estimated to account for 35-40% of all TV advertising. Based on 2009 Neilson figures that would put the value at between £1.2 and £1.35 billion!
But let me forget my grumpiness for a minute. A study being done by a reputable trade body such as the DMA backing up what we have been saying for quite a while now is fantastic.
At MC&C, we have numerous case studies showing that TV uplifts other activity – DRTV, inserts, doordrops, search etc. And it's nice to have someone back it up.
Anything that gets brands back to spending on TV has to be good for everyone in the media and advertising industry. This might help the TV stations get back the nearly £1/2 billion revenue lost from 2008!
Nicky Legg, Broadcast Director
Thursday 28 January 2010
Tuesday 26 January 2010
Is L’Oreal wrecking your magazine recruitment strategy?
The Daily Mail is re-launching its highly successful Weekend Magazine on the 30th January. MC&C have seen the dummy and, as you might expect from the deep pockets of Associated, it looks great!
Further refined focus on the female readership with celebrity photo shoots & interviews, fashion, shopping and food, with the usual support in the back half from the weekly TV review, gardening and travel. All in the best possible taste – Darlings!
Issue sizes will increase from 72 to 80 pages and advertising pages will also increase by 3 or 4 an issue. It will benefit from a national marketing re-launch and we would expect the magazine to have traction with the readership and deliver strong numbers.
So what’s the problem? Well if you are a direct response advertiser, then advertising will be restricted to a minimum 4 page “classified” section at the back of the title, with no opportunity to book covers or opposite display editorial pages. As a result, this stalwart of the mail order sector will reduce in its ability to deliver volume, optimum ROI efficiency, as well as brand traction.
So why have The Daily Mail done it? You guessed it – revenue! The national press supplement market has been traditionally reliant on DR revenues for its income. As traditional media channels have diversified and online grown spectacularly, DR advertisers have been spending less.
So who did they turn to? L’Oreal and the other brand fashionistas! But they won’t book into low quality editorial or a editorial environment that contains any DR advertising whatsoever. So media owners have had to fundamentally change their product in order to chase the money.
But Hey! How difficult is this decision really? It’s a no brainer! You Magazine blazed the trail almost 10 years ago, morphing into a quasi Marie Claire / She magazine and banishing all but the blandest of brand/DR ads from the magazine altogether. Live followed – they similarly upgraded their male focussed content two weekends ago – but have not taken DR for over 3 years.
The real “sit up and smell the coffee” moment has been News Group’s Fabulous. On the 3rd February 2008 they scrapped Sunday Magazine , relaunched as a female magazine and banished DR altogether. Sources indicate that this magazine actually saw a double digit revenue increase year on year in very challenging times. This has not gone unnoticed by other publishers.
So how long can Mirror Group & Express resist this move? Even the likes of the weekly magazine groups like IPC and Bauer have done very nicely thank you last year on reduced pagination and FMCG advertising – pushing DR advertisers out because they pay less!
So what to do about it? Yes re-negotiate your rates. But this does not address the fundamental issues of replacing volumes and growing quality customer bases.
So if you thought online was just PPC – think again. Are you engaging with the even larger number of online readers that traditional media owners often reach? Partnerships, video, cost per acquisition deals. No? Colour classified in newspapers? You have never got DRTV to work? And what about pre-rolls and VOD?
MC&C think ahead for our clients and look to manage the risk of evolving recruitment strategies proactively as the marketplace evolves. Remember: the next time you see a lipstick advert in a national press supplement – you are probably kissing a frog!
John Willacy, Trading Director
Further refined focus on the female readership with celebrity photo shoots & interviews, fashion, shopping and food, with the usual support in the back half from the weekly TV review, gardening and travel. All in the best possible taste – Darlings!
Issue sizes will increase from 72 to 80 pages and advertising pages will also increase by 3 or 4 an issue. It will benefit from a national marketing re-launch and we would expect the magazine to have traction with the readership and deliver strong numbers.
So what’s the problem? Well if you are a direct response advertiser, then advertising will be restricted to a minimum 4 page “classified” section at the back of the title, with no opportunity to book covers or opposite display editorial pages. As a result, this stalwart of the mail order sector will reduce in its ability to deliver volume, optimum ROI efficiency, as well as brand traction.
So why have The Daily Mail done it? You guessed it – revenue! The national press supplement market has been traditionally reliant on DR revenues for its income. As traditional media channels have diversified and online grown spectacularly, DR advertisers have been spending less.
So who did they turn to? L’Oreal and the other brand fashionistas! But they won’t book into low quality editorial or a editorial environment that contains any DR advertising whatsoever. So media owners have had to fundamentally change their product in order to chase the money.
But Hey! How difficult is this decision really? It’s a no brainer! You Magazine blazed the trail almost 10 years ago, morphing into a quasi Marie Claire / She magazine and banishing all but the blandest of brand/DR ads from the magazine altogether. Live followed – they similarly upgraded their male focussed content two weekends ago – but have not taken DR for over 3 years.
The real “sit up and smell the coffee” moment has been News Group’s Fabulous. On the 3rd February 2008 they scrapped Sunday Magazine , relaunched as a female magazine and banished DR altogether. Sources indicate that this magazine actually saw a double digit revenue increase year on year in very challenging times. This has not gone unnoticed by other publishers.
So how long can Mirror Group & Express resist this move? Even the likes of the weekly magazine groups like IPC and Bauer have done very nicely thank you last year on reduced pagination and FMCG advertising – pushing DR advertisers out because they pay less!
So what to do about it? Yes re-negotiate your rates. But this does not address the fundamental issues of replacing volumes and growing quality customer bases.
So if you thought online was just PPC – think again. Are you engaging with the even larger number of online readers that traditional media owners often reach? Partnerships, video, cost per acquisition deals. No? Colour classified in newspapers? You have never got DRTV to work? And what about pre-rolls and VOD?
MC&C think ahead for our clients and look to manage the risk of evolving recruitment strategies proactively as the marketplace evolves. Remember: the next time you see a lipstick advert in a national press supplement – you are probably kissing a frog!
John Willacy, Trading Director
Thursday 21 January 2010
3D: the future of advertising?
Took myself and the boys off to see Avatar at the weekend. OK Sci Fi story but the 3D special effects were magnificent.
It has to be the future of video – and video advertising. Cars would leap out of the screen at you; well-honed bodies would thrust beauty and grooming products at you; and you’d positively want to reach into the screen to help those poor freezing meercats.
But is this realistic? Whether or not film studios decide that 3D is the future of block-buster movies, the future of TV is far more uncertain. It isn’t that 3D-capable TVs would be massively expensive to manufacture. Or that home audiences would be reluctant to wear 3D glasses.
There just isn’t a lot of money around in TV studios at the moment. Sky (buoyed up by subscription revenues) is planning a 3D TV channel later this year. But it is unlikely that many other commercial broadcasters will be spending a lot of money on creating 3D programming. Even with the benefits of Moore’s Law, this would require an unrealistically large investment in new equipment for several years yet, as well as the development of new skill sets within TV production and artistic staff.
Nonetheless 3D advertising does have an allure that perhaps advertisers will find hard to resist. So if they cannot find an outlet in TV, where will they look?
Well, cinema of course is one place. Wrigley launched a 3D cinema ad last summer. And more recently brands like Royal Caribbean have created ads that do make good use of 3D technology. But cinema, although a fine place to display high quality advertising, is limited in terms of reach and frequency.
Perhaps the future lies elsewhere. Increasingly TVs come ready for connection to the internet. And “watching” the internet on TV – whether it’s for catch up TV, looking at Youtube videos or simply communicating via Facebook – is increasingly common. Is there an opportunity then for TV-delivered internet to be the place that 3D advertising comes alive?
Hmm – I can’t see many people donning those 3D glasses to just to watch advertising! So if 3D advertising is to succeed it will have to be placed in a context where people are already wearing their specs. Where could that be? Well, some might argue that 3D effects make more sense in a video game than in a movie. And certainly 3D video games are going to be big business in the next months…
Could “in-game” or “advergaming” be the future of 3D advertising? The medium has beeen around for years (remember the Peperami animal game?). But it’s never really taken off. Perhaps this time round it will.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
It has to be the future of video – and video advertising. Cars would leap out of the screen at you; well-honed bodies would thrust beauty and grooming products at you; and you’d positively want to reach into the screen to help those poor freezing meercats.
But is this realistic? Whether or not film studios decide that 3D is the future of block-buster movies, the future of TV is far more uncertain. It isn’t that 3D-capable TVs would be massively expensive to manufacture. Or that home audiences would be reluctant to wear 3D glasses.
There just isn’t a lot of money around in TV studios at the moment. Sky (buoyed up by subscription revenues) is planning a 3D TV channel later this year. But it is unlikely that many other commercial broadcasters will be spending a lot of money on creating 3D programming. Even with the benefits of Moore’s Law, this would require an unrealistically large investment in new equipment for several years yet, as well as the development of new skill sets within TV production and artistic staff.
Nonetheless 3D advertising does have an allure that perhaps advertisers will find hard to resist. So if they cannot find an outlet in TV, where will they look?
Well, cinema of course is one place. Wrigley launched a 3D cinema ad last summer. And more recently brands like Royal Caribbean have created ads that do make good use of 3D technology. But cinema, although a fine place to display high quality advertising, is limited in terms of reach and frequency.
Perhaps the future lies elsewhere. Increasingly TVs come ready for connection to the internet. And “watching” the internet on TV – whether it’s for catch up TV, looking at Youtube videos or simply communicating via Facebook – is increasingly common. Is there an opportunity then for TV-delivered internet to be the place that 3D advertising comes alive?
Hmm – I can’t see many people donning those 3D glasses to just to watch advertising! So if 3D advertising is to succeed it will have to be placed in a context where people are already wearing their specs. Where could that be? Well, some might argue that 3D effects make more sense in a video game than in a movie. And certainly 3D video games are going to be big business in the next months…
Could “in-game” or “advergaming” be the future of 3D advertising? The medium has beeen around for years (remember the Peperami animal game?). But it’s never really taken off. Perhaps this time round it will.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
Tuesday 19 January 2010
India: A massive emerging DR opportunity
I have just had four of the most energetic and enervating days that I have had for a long time. One of our clients asked me to join them for a trip to Mumbai to review the media scene there, and the opportunities for recruiting subscribers to their organisation.
Before I went I guess my understanding of India was hazy to say the least - major inputs being Slumdog Millionaire and EM Forster.
What I found was a group of bright, creative, motivated entrepreneurs. And that applied across the board from the smaller organisations right up to big corporates.
We met with a bunch of media owners, clients and agencies. What we found was a media scene of extremes. Fewer than 10 million broadband internet connections. More than 350 million mobile phones. The largest circulation newspaper at just 5 million copies, but pay TV penetration at nearly 100 million homes.
Direct marketing as a discipline is still fairly immature. It is used mostly for CRM (airline loyalty programmes, financial services cross selling). There is little direct mail for acquisition as data sets are small and of dubious quality.
But the DRTV scene is alive and flourishing. The suburban Indian housewife has discovered the delights of slow cookers, teeth whiteners and exercise equipment in the same way middle America did. And DRTV is beginning to creep into the mainstream marketers lexicon, with financial services and charities conducting campaigns that we would recognise in the UK.
It's potentially a very interesting opportunity for DM acquisition. A growing market of affluent middle class (numbers vary but think more middle class Indians than Americans in the next 10 years), very low media rates (say 10%-20% of UK rates) and a sophisticated call centre infrastructure.
I’m going back. I don’t know how yet, but I am sure India represents volume and value opportunities for our clients and ourselves.
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Before I went I guess my understanding of India was hazy to say the least - major inputs being Slumdog Millionaire and EM Forster.
What I found was a group of bright, creative, motivated entrepreneurs. And that applied across the board from the smaller organisations right up to big corporates.
We met with a bunch of media owners, clients and agencies. What we found was a media scene of extremes. Fewer than 10 million broadband internet connections. More than 350 million mobile phones. The largest circulation newspaper at just 5 million copies, but pay TV penetration at nearly 100 million homes.
Direct marketing as a discipline is still fairly immature. It is used mostly for CRM (airline loyalty programmes, financial services cross selling). There is little direct mail for acquisition as data sets are small and of dubious quality.
But the DRTV scene is alive and flourishing. The suburban Indian housewife has discovered the delights of slow cookers, teeth whiteners and exercise equipment in the same way middle America did. And DRTV is beginning to creep into the mainstream marketers lexicon, with financial services and charities conducting campaigns that we would recognise in the UK.
It's potentially a very interesting opportunity for DM acquisition. A growing market of affluent middle class (numbers vary but think more middle class Indians than Americans in the next 10 years), very low media rates (say 10%-20% of UK rates) and a sophisticated call centre infrastructure.
I’m going back. I don’t know how yet, but I am sure India represents volume and value opportunities for our clients and ourselves.
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Friday 15 January 2010
Improving measurability between off line and online media
We now understand more about the link between online and offline media. And we know more about the customer journey. But are we using this understanding to measure the journey a consumer takes between offline and online media?
Is it sufficient to say we know that offline media drives consumers online when we can't measure the success our offline media has in driving potential customers online?
How can we identify which of our offline media drives our search? We can monitor the search uplift in and around television adverts, as we know what time the messages are consumed by our audience so any spikes can reasonably be attributed to these spots.
It's trickier where press and out of home are concerned because when the media are consumed is harder to pin-point. And of course increased time shifting behaviour with TV (e.g. PVRs and ITV Player) makes even TV's effect on online harder to measure.
But what if we told our audience what to search for online within the creative copy?
Potentially we could use one word for tube car panels that is relevant and memorable to the campaign, one for our press adverts and a different one for TV. The copy could simply read “to find out more search…….”, or “to take advantage of this offer search……”.
There's another benefit. If the key words or search terms used are different to those your competitors are using then this could mean you to pay less per click to obtain a customer compared to the more expensive generic search terms that are used by people who have not seen an offline advert.
And you are more likely to convert your audience. Sometimes if you are not at the top of search listings you lose a potential sale to one of your competitors (which you really earned because you paid for the offline ad which drove them online in the first place!)
This problem can be alleviated by using the “search for” mechanism as none (or certainly fewer) of your competitors should appear in the search listings.
Measurable, cheaper and more effective. Media-relevant campaign search terms are a powerful tool!
Christopher Bell, Media Assistant
Is it sufficient to say we know that offline media drives consumers online when we can't measure the success our offline media has in driving potential customers online?
How can we identify which of our offline media drives our search? We can monitor the search uplift in and around television adverts, as we know what time the messages are consumed by our audience so any spikes can reasonably be attributed to these spots.
It's trickier where press and out of home are concerned because when the media are consumed is harder to pin-point. And of course increased time shifting behaviour with TV (e.g. PVRs and ITV Player) makes even TV's effect on online harder to measure.
But what if we told our audience what to search for online within the creative copy?
Potentially we could use one word for tube car panels that is relevant and memorable to the campaign, one for our press adverts and a different one for TV. The copy could simply read “to find out more search…….”, or “to take advantage of this offer search……”.
There's another benefit. If the key words or search terms used are different to those your competitors are using then this could mean you to pay less per click to obtain a customer compared to the more expensive generic search terms that are used by people who have not seen an offline advert.
And you are more likely to convert your audience. Sometimes if you are not at the top of search listings you lose a potential sale to one of your competitors (which you really earned because you paid for the offline ad which drove them online in the first place!)
This problem can be alleviated by using the “search for” mechanism as none (or certainly fewer) of your competitors should appear in the search listings.
Measurable, cheaper and more effective. Media-relevant campaign search terms are a powerful tool!
Christopher Bell, Media Assistant
Thursday 7 January 2010
Useful local apps will build real brand engagement
There are seminal moments in the development of any new medium and I think I have just been part of one.
Check out http://uksnow.benmarsh.co.uk/ or see #uksnowmap 2.0 on Twitter.
It’s a Google map of the UK, but with tweet comments on snow fall and uploaded mobile phone photos of the snow where the users are.
Never mind weather reports and AA snap shots, this is real-time real-location weather reporting.
This is a great example of consumers congregating around a brand new but really relevant and useful application.
The first brand to harness this level of local engagement will do so well. I want it to be one of ours!
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Check out http://uksnow.benmarsh.co.uk/ or see #uksnowmap 2.0 on Twitter.
It’s a Google map of the UK, but with tweet comments on snow fall and uploaded mobile phone photos of the snow where the users are.
Never mind weather reports and AA snap shots, this is real-time real-location weather reporting.
This is a great example of consumers congregating around a brand new but really relevant and useful application.
The first brand to harness this level of local engagement will do so well. I want it to be one of ours!
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Tuesday 5 January 2010
Social media etiquette
In the last few weeks I have witnessed a couple of occasions when people who have been asked for “friendship” on social media sites have reacted aggressively.
In one instance a woman on LinkedIn asked for reassurance when someone she had tried to connect with rebuffed her approach and told her not to “misuse” the system. Unsurprisingly she received a lot of support and sympathy from other members.
And then, more recently, I read a vigorous discussion in the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) about the rights and wrongs of someone on the list asking another member for friend status on Facebook. In this case the reactions were far more mixed with as many people decrying this as an intrusion as supporting the attempt at building a network.
So who’s right? What is the etiquette here?
In LinkedIn it seems perfectly in order to ask to connect with someone who is a member of the same professional group that you are a member of. Surely that is what online networking is about.
It’s like being at a party or a business networking event: you may not know someone there but you talk to them because you have friends or colleagues in common. And if the person you approach doesn’t want to connect with you all they have to do is say “no”. There is no need to shout and scream about “misusing” the party!
But is Facebook any different? Well, I suppose Facebook is often more closely aligned to friendships in the physical world. But not always.
Increasingly Facebook is used to set up interest groups (in a similar way to Ning, I guess.) And in the case I am talking about the “victim/criminal” was using Facebook to promote a professional grouping on Ning. So it seems perfectly reasonable for him to get in touch with people asking them to “friend” him and join his new group. And again, if people don’t want to connect, all they need to do is say “no”. (I also got an invitation, which I accepted even though I have never met him.)
My conclusions?
First there are plenty of plonkers in the world and if you ever raise your head above the online parapet you should do so in the expectation that one of them may well have a pop at you. So make sure that your skin is at least reasonably thick.
And second, if you are approached by someone you don’t know, and don’t want to know, in a social networking environment, just say “no thanks” politely. To respond to a social invitation with rudeness implies that you are either bizarrely terrified of other people or massively puffed up with your own importance. Neither says much about you.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
In one instance a woman on LinkedIn asked for reassurance when someone she had tried to connect with rebuffed her approach and told her not to “misuse” the system. Unsurprisingly she received a lot of support and sympathy from other members.
And then, more recently, I read a vigorous discussion in the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) about the rights and wrongs of someone on the list asking another member for friend status on Facebook. In this case the reactions were far more mixed with as many people decrying this as an intrusion as supporting the attempt at building a network.
So who’s right? What is the etiquette here?
In LinkedIn it seems perfectly in order to ask to connect with someone who is a member of the same professional group that you are a member of. Surely that is what online networking is about.
It’s like being at a party or a business networking event: you may not know someone there but you talk to them because you have friends or colleagues in common. And if the person you approach doesn’t want to connect with you all they have to do is say “no”. There is no need to shout and scream about “misusing” the party!
But is Facebook any different? Well, I suppose Facebook is often more closely aligned to friendships in the physical world. But not always.
Increasingly Facebook is used to set up interest groups (in a similar way to Ning, I guess.) And in the case I am talking about the “victim/criminal” was using Facebook to promote a professional grouping on Ning. So it seems perfectly reasonable for him to get in touch with people asking them to “friend” him and join his new group. And again, if people don’t want to connect, all they need to do is say “no”. (I also got an invitation, which I accepted even though I have never met him.)
My conclusions?
First there are plenty of plonkers in the world and if you ever raise your head above the online parapet you should do so in the expectation that one of them may well have a pop at you. So make sure that your skin is at least reasonably thick.
And second, if you are approached by someone you don’t know, and don’t want to know, in a social networking environment, just say “no thanks” politely. To respond to a social invitation with rudeness implies that you are either bizarrely terrified of other people or massively puffed up with your own importance. Neither says much about you.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)