It’s now nearly two weeks since the dreadful tsunami hit Japan. Unlike its 2004 predecessor when disaster relief fundraising started at a huge scale almost the next day, there was initial confusion as to whether a first-world economy like Japan needed support.
When the scale of the problem became apparent only a select few organizations became involved and started direct appeals. These included the Red Cross, and our own client The Salvation Army, who had relief workers on the ground less than 24 hours after the tsunami hit and who began emergency appeal advertising within the first week. We weren’t surprised by the results we are seeing to press advertising, search and other online appeals.
What has surprised us is the results we are seeing to other charity donor recruitment during the last two weeks.
Those of you who know us well know that we work with some 18 charities, including a number of development organizations such as Oxfam, WaterAid and Care.
We have a number of campaigns running, typically multi-media integrated campaigns, using DRTV, door drops, inserts, search, online display and email.
We have seen a significant increase in response to these campaigns since the tsunami hit, most noticeable to the sms response from drtv.
To our minds this serves to underline, once again, that the recession cannot be blamed for poor fundraising performance. As fundraisers the challenge is to show a clear demonstrable need. Show that need, and the means to alleviate it, and one can fundraise in any environment.
Mike Colling
Managing Director
Thursday 24 March 2011
Monday 21 March 2011
Changing Affluence
I’m at Cheltenham this week, racing, and whilst I won’t pretend it’s 99% play, a little work does creep in from time to time!
Not only are there record crowds (probably a result of a very strong promotional campaign) there also seems to be record shopping.
Whilst the highstreet outside may be suffering (retail sales down 0.4% in February 2011 see http://www.brc.org.uk/brc_news_detail.asp?id=1908) the shops at the racecourse are packed to the gunnels.
Yet another piece of evidence for the rapidly changing pattern of UK affluence at both a tribal and micro regional level. Across many of our clients we are seeing significant changes to their transactional audiences. It’s not the same people borrowing, saving, spending or donating as it was even two years ago. And that has massive implications for media planning, be it a full scale integrated media campaign or a simple DRTV schedule.
Our last newsletter talked about the work we are doing looking at changing patterns of UK affluence. We would love to speak further with anyone who suspects it might be happening to them.
Mike Colling
Managing Director
Not only are there record crowds (probably a result of a very strong promotional campaign) there also seems to be record shopping.
Whilst the highstreet outside may be suffering (retail sales down 0.4% in February 2011 see http://www.brc.org.uk/brc_news_detail.asp?id=1908) the shops at the racecourse are packed to the gunnels.
Yet another piece of evidence for the rapidly changing pattern of UK affluence at both a tribal and micro regional level. Across many of our clients we are seeing significant changes to their transactional audiences. It’s not the same people borrowing, saving, spending or donating as it was even two years ago. And that has massive implications for media planning, be it a full scale integrated media campaign or a simple DRTV schedule.
Our last newsletter talked about the work we are doing looking at changing patterns of UK affluence. We would love to speak further with anyone who suspects it might be happening to them.
Mike Colling
Managing Director
Friday 11 March 2011
New cookie laws could change online environment
If some mainstream press reporting is to be believed, online corporate evil is spreading its net far and wide and like the eye of Sauron will soon seek you out and make you its slave. The reality is that cookies have been used online for years and very few people have been adversely affected by them when used in a reputable fashion by reputable websites. Whilst I’m not advocating the stockpiling of online user data and the auctioning off of our privacy I also think that a measured approach is necessary in curbing the use of cookie technology. Opting in to every advert shown would be more annoying to the user than the ads themselves and blocking access to certain sites because you don’t want the tailored ads would also be OTT.
So what’s the alternative? Well you could have a paid for internet as a development of the UK TV license system which would be about as popular as socks with sandals or users will have to use web browsers to make decisions for them regarding access allowed by cookies to track their movements and behaviour. This would be one business making decisions about another business having access to a user; no chance of corporate politics there then! The reality is that the simplest thing to do would probably be not to target ads to users at all. This won’t mean there are less ads shown to users, as seems to be the general view, it just means that users would see as many if not more ads that are less relevant and arguably more annoying than the targeted ads that went before them. Nothing like a conservative 80 year old seeing a FHM ad targeted at 20 something lads to set blood pressures skyward!
To help reach a reasoned view of cookies and their use I think it would be beneficial for the general public to receive more information and education about how they work therefore allowing people to make their own decisions. At the moment I feel that most users think cookies are evil and so are the companies, not forgetting governments, that use them. Not that I’m totally in favour of cookies as such, please don’t get that Idea, I’m just not convinced that the current proposed solutions would be beneficial for business or consumers.
Once an acceptable technological solution is found I’m sure the furore will soon die down and ‘normality’ will be restored, but until this time remember as the worldly wise Mark Knopfler said ‘Get your email for nothing and your clicks for free’ kind of….
Bodhi Morrison
Head of Digital
So what’s the alternative? Well you could have a paid for internet as a development of the UK TV license system which would be about as popular as socks with sandals or users will have to use web browsers to make decisions for them regarding access allowed by cookies to track their movements and behaviour. This would be one business making decisions about another business having access to a user; no chance of corporate politics there then! The reality is that the simplest thing to do would probably be not to target ads to users at all. This won’t mean there are less ads shown to users, as seems to be the general view, it just means that users would see as many if not more ads that are less relevant and arguably more annoying than the targeted ads that went before them. Nothing like a conservative 80 year old seeing a FHM ad targeted at 20 something lads to set blood pressures skyward!
To help reach a reasoned view of cookies and their use I think it would be beneficial for the general public to receive more information and education about how they work therefore allowing people to make their own decisions. At the moment I feel that most users think cookies are evil and so are the companies, not forgetting governments, that use them. Not that I’m totally in favour of cookies as such, please don’t get that Idea, I’m just not convinced that the current proposed solutions would be beneficial for business or consumers.
Once an acceptable technological solution is found I’m sure the furore will soon die down and ‘normality’ will be restored, but until this time remember as the worldly wise Mark Knopfler said ‘Get your email for nothing and your clicks for free’ kind of….
Bodhi Morrison
Head of Digital
Wednesday 9 March 2011
Keep Calm and Carry On!
You will have probably read or heard stories about TV airtime prices potentially rocketing this year as a result of a decision in the House of Lords.
The advice at mc&c is, in short, “don’t panic”. We are a long way away from seeing TV prices jump by 25% overnight.
So what’s all the fuss about?
The House of Lords Communication Committee has recently published its report on the TV advertising market-place after six months of research and interviews.
It is worth noting that all of its findings are only recommendations - the government now has two months to accept, reject or simply note them and continue as is. They may just be used to start the discussions on policy within parliament.
The Lords have recommended three things:-
1. Standardise the number of advertising minutes to an average of seven minutes across all channels. This is currently the case on ITV1, Channels 4 and Five but multi-channel stations can average nine minutes per hour. As a result this won't affect the pricing across the terrestrial channels - in fact they welcome it - but it could push pricing up across the rest. Currently, several channels don't open up all the minutage they have available anyway as a way of decreasing supply.
How will this affect us?
We expect, that with careful planning and negotiation this will have minimal impact on our pricing, if and when it is enforced.
2. The removal of CRR - when Granada and Carlton merged to sell ITV1 as one entity in 2004, a mechanism known as Contract Rights Renewal (CRR) was put into place - essentially this meant that all of the rules that prevented ITV having a monopoly over the UK TV advertising market had to continue to be observed - eg sales by region, pricing in line with share of impacts delivered. The Committee is recommending CRR be scrapped and replaced with binding agreements to increase UK originated programming funded by the increased a revenue.
How will this affect us?
Again minimal impact. Firstly, the removal of CRR is most unlikely to be implemented. Secondly, CRR has historically been most beneficial to agencies who tie clients into year long share deals which we don't do.
3. The final main recommendation is to convene a panel of independent experts to carry out a review of the trading system for television advertising airtime. It would run over six months and should be a good thing if it happens. This is the one that the broadcasters are saying least about - so it’s most likely to be against them. If however, agencies are allowed to have their say - I'll be the first in line!!
So in summary, don’t panic. It’s true TV airtime prices are rising this year, but in line with returning advertising budgets. These extraneous impacts on prices are very unlikely to impact the prices most advertisers are paying. If things change, we’ll update you but in the meantime, our recommendation would be to resume normal behaviour.
If you do have any questions or concerns relating to the Communication Committee’s report, please do not hesitate to contact Nicky Legg or any member of the broadcast team on 020-7307 6100.
Nicky Legg
Broadcast Director
The advice at mc&c is, in short, “don’t panic”. We are a long way away from seeing TV prices jump by 25% overnight.
So what’s all the fuss about?
The House of Lords Communication Committee has recently published its report on the TV advertising market-place after six months of research and interviews.
It is worth noting that all of its findings are only recommendations - the government now has two months to accept, reject or simply note them and continue as is. They may just be used to start the discussions on policy within parliament.
The Lords have recommended three things:-
1. Standardise the number of advertising minutes to an average of seven minutes across all channels. This is currently the case on ITV1, Channels 4 and Five but multi-channel stations can average nine minutes per hour. As a result this won't affect the pricing across the terrestrial channels - in fact they welcome it - but it could push pricing up across the rest. Currently, several channels don't open up all the minutage they have available anyway as a way of decreasing supply.
How will this affect us?
We expect, that with careful planning and negotiation this will have minimal impact on our pricing, if and when it is enforced.
2. The removal of CRR - when Granada and Carlton merged to sell ITV1 as one entity in 2004, a mechanism known as Contract Rights Renewal (CRR) was put into place - essentially this meant that all of the rules that prevented ITV having a monopoly over the UK TV advertising market had to continue to be observed - eg sales by region, pricing in line with share of impacts delivered. The Committee is recommending CRR be scrapped and replaced with binding agreements to increase UK originated programming funded by the increased a revenue.
How will this affect us?
Again minimal impact. Firstly, the removal of CRR is most unlikely to be implemented. Secondly, CRR has historically been most beneficial to agencies who tie clients into year long share deals which we don't do.
3. The final main recommendation is to convene a panel of independent experts to carry out a review of the trading system for television advertising airtime. It would run over six months and should be a good thing if it happens. This is the one that the broadcasters are saying least about - so it’s most likely to be against them. If however, agencies are allowed to have their say - I'll be the first in line!!
So in summary, don’t panic. It’s true TV airtime prices are rising this year, but in line with returning advertising budgets. These extraneous impacts on prices are very unlikely to impact the prices most advertisers are paying. If things change, we’ll update you but in the meantime, our recommendation would be to resume normal behaviour.
If you do have any questions or concerns relating to the Communication Committee’s report, please do not hesitate to contact Nicky Legg or any member of the broadcast team on 020-7307 6100.
Nicky Legg
Broadcast Director
Wednesday 2 March 2011
Product Placement – Coming To A Screen Near You!
From 28th February 2011, certain categories of programme that are made for UK audiences will be able to contain product placement – this is when a company pays a TV channel or programme maker to include its brands or products in a programme.
The key driver of the introduction of product placement in the UK is the harmonisation of broadcasting regulation across Europe. In addition, there is a feeling that a level playing field should be adopted – given that we’re already seeing product placement across a number of imported shows – without necessarily being aware of it.
So how will it work? Product placement should be seen as a unique opportunity to advertisers - it is most likely to generate effectiveness when used alongside spot advertising or sponsorship by incrementally influencing brand affinity. It shouldn’t be seen as a replacement to spot advertising but rather as an incremental revenue for broadcasters - this has been backed up by Nielsen who found that when spot advertising is paired with product placement it generates double the recall and double the purchase intent.
As with most new initiatives, there are rules associated with the use of product placement, largely in place to protect the quality of programming. Products will not be placed in news or children’s programmes, as well as religious, current affairs and consumer advice programmes. There must also be “editorial relevance” for the product – meaning that it should have a natural fit within the programme and should not be given too much prominence.
UK viewers are being kept in the loop of this development – a special “P” logo will be shown for 3 seconds at the beginning of the programme and during the ad breaks within the programme that contains product placement. ITV have also created a TV spot which will air across the leading broadcasters’ channels as an audience awareness campaign.
There are still a number of question marks surrounding the use of product placement –in particular associated with its effectiveness, measurement and value.
One thing’s for certain though - it’s an exciting opportunity and it means that broadcasters can continue to invest incremental income into quality content, which can only be a good thing for advertisers.
Helen Guard
Senior TV Planner Buyer
The key driver of the introduction of product placement in the UK is the harmonisation of broadcasting regulation across Europe. In addition, there is a feeling that a level playing field should be adopted – given that we’re already seeing product placement across a number of imported shows – without necessarily being aware of it.
So how will it work? Product placement should be seen as a unique opportunity to advertisers - it is most likely to generate effectiveness when used alongside spot advertising or sponsorship by incrementally influencing brand affinity. It shouldn’t be seen as a replacement to spot advertising but rather as an incremental revenue for broadcasters - this has been backed up by Nielsen who found that when spot advertising is paired with product placement it generates double the recall and double the purchase intent.
As with most new initiatives, there are rules associated with the use of product placement, largely in place to protect the quality of programming. Products will not be placed in news or children’s programmes, as well as religious, current affairs and consumer advice programmes. There must also be “editorial relevance” for the product – meaning that it should have a natural fit within the programme and should not be given too much prominence.
UK viewers are being kept in the loop of this development – a special “P” logo will be shown for 3 seconds at the beginning of the programme and during the ad breaks within the programme that contains product placement. ITV have also created a TV spot which will air across the leading broadcasters’ channels as an audience awareness campaign.
There are still a number of question marks surrounding the use of product placement –in particular associated with its effectiveness, measurement and value.
One thing’s for certain though - it’s an exciting opportunity and it means that broadcasters can continue to invest incremental income into quality content, which can only be a good thing for advertisers.
Helen Guard
Senior TV Planner Buyer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)