My wife and I like to play name-that-voice with the more and more celebs we hear doing voiceovers for TV commercials. If you've been stumped lately, maybe this will help you settle an argument or two.
I caught Kiefer Sutherland's voice for Apple right away and thought it was the perfect blend of recognizable and captivating. Is it worth seven figures? Who knows.
As a parent of a 3 year-old, I can certainly relate to this interaction between BloggingBaby's Sarah Gilbert and her son. Seems the little guy is far more interested in the bag of brand name Cheetos than the already open bag of store brand Cheeto-like snack thingies. Well, the bag of Cheetos has a cartoon cheetah on it which her son calls "the Cheeto guy," so yeah, they got him.
The British Heart Association has launched the Food4Thought campaign designed to give kids the real (and sometime scary) scoop on what they're eating and how to make better food choices. They aim to shock with images of raw, unprocessed ingredients in such fast foods as hot dogs, chicken nuggets and burgers. But more importantly, they offer food facts (for the good and the bad), a glossary of food label items, recipes and more. This is a great effort!
Previous relevant posts:
Hey Kids, Here Comes the Pitch
Hey Kids, Here Comes the Pitch (II)
Hey Kids, Here Comes the Pitch (III)
Hey Kids, Here Comes the Pitch (IV)
Hey Kids, Here Comes the Pitch (V)
via [Slashfood]
Freakonomics blog points to a press release by the American Beverage Association outlining its new recommendations for cutting back on sodas in school vending machines. While the idea is great, substituting soda for high-sugar (and thus high-calorie) fruit juice isn't necessarily helpful as calories are calories. They also list things that they believe to be okay like sports drinks and low-calorie soft drinks. But sports drinks are generally sweetened with the same high-fructose corn syrup as sodas and even low-calorie soft drinks have artificial sweeteners and caffeine that kids don't need. Maybe the problem is having vending machines in schools in the first place?
As a follow-up to this post, TiVo is now offering advertisers banner ads that remain on the screen in fast-forward mode.
In an effort to make television commercials effective even when seen through a DVR in fast-forward mode, research firm Frank N. Magid Associates suggests the following:
This Media Life article (from where the above recommendations came) also contains other stats on DVR viewing habits gleaned from a Magid online study.
via [Lost Remote]
CBS Chairman Les Moonves recently discussed how he sees a significant increase in television product placements on the horizon. He references selling rights to everything from the brand of car driven that to the brand of orange juice characters drink. Interestingly, it wasn't long ago that product brand names were being obscured because shows didn't have the rights to use them. We all remember seeing cereal boxes and soda cans with tape over the names or some other alteration to the packaging. Now, those very same brands are paying to have their product names shown.
I actually think it makes perfect sense, as long as viewers are treated with respect. Let's face it, television ads are becoming less and less effective and more and more people will be skipping ads through their DVR's in coming years. If I were a television advertiser, I would much rather have my product used by a popular TV character than lost amidst a sea of 30-second spots. The trick is, it has to be natural.
For instance, I recall an episode of Alias where the good-guys were chasing the bad-guys and the good-guys said something like, "There they go...in the F-150." It was so blatant and silly that my wife and I both laughed out loud because that's not what someone in that situation would say. They would say, "There they go, in that blue truck." I also recall an episode of The West Wing that had three or four blatant product placements, only two of which I even remember now. One was where one character told the other to "Google" someone to get more information on them and another character was called "Mr. Moto" (a la Motorola's recent ad campaign) for not being willing to part with his cell phone (or pager) for a few minutes (or something like that???). While that may be how people really speak, it was just a little too in-your-face.
Viewers are smart and the subtleties of using real products in a show makes that show more realistic. But, if those products are thrown in people's faces, they will resent it and the result will likely be the opposite of what advertisers want. So, to promote a brand of mobile phone service, don't have a character say, "Call me on my Verizon Wireless phone." Instead, have the phone simply ring with the ringtone we are used to hearing from that provider's ads and their phones on the street. People will get it. In other cases, naturally show the screen of a website someone is using, or the logo of the car they are driving, or the packaging of the beverage they are consuming.
I believe there is huge potential for the effective use of product placements to be lucrative for both the advertisers and the television industry. They just need to be subtle, natural and in context so as not to abuse the very viewers advertisers are trying to persuade.
Dan Jaffe of the Association of National Advertisers believes research is showing that advertising may not be the primary culprit in the increasing childhood obesity problem.
For those interested in advertising, Dan Jaffe's blog seems like a great one to keep up with. Very interesting.
via [Adrants]
According to this article in The New York Times, advertisers are turning to recurring ensemble casts for TV spots in hopes people "...will look forward to the ads, wondering when and how the cast will turn up."
Couldn't Adweek have come up with a more creative name for its new alternative advertising publication than Other Advertising? According to Adrants, Other Advertising "will cover non-traditional advertising categories it defines as mass transit, sports stadiums, in-store, product placement, cinemas, elevators, cell phones, guerrilla marketing. Content will include business news, case studies, profiles and guest editorials." I just wish an advertising publication could have come up with a better, less on-the-nose, name.
And while I'm ranting, how about the new A Diamond Is Forever tag line: I Forever Do??? Whereas "I Forever Do" sounds silly and grammatically incorrect, "I Do...Forever" would have been a much classier and less silly way to convey the same message. Just my two-cents.
As a follow-up to my last post, this article cites how PepsiCo is planning to restrict advertising to children and reduce serving sizes in schools. A trend that I, for one, hope catches on.
via [URBANintelligence]
British consumer advocacy group, Which?, has taken issue with cartoon characters being used to market unhealthy foods to kids. Their research showed that "77 percent of people think using kids' favorite cartoon characters such as Shrek, The Simpsons and Scooby Doo, on the packs of foods high in fat, salt and sugar makes it difficult for parents to say no to their children." This, to me, is one of those "no-duh" stats that only makes me wonder what the other 23% are thinking?
I do the grocery shopping in my household and am always on the lookout for foods that I think my young son will find fun and interesting. I turn over box after box and package after package of food items being marketed to and for kids only to put them right back after reading the ingredients. High-fructose this and trans fat that. There is no way I'm putting that stuff into my kid's body in any significant quantity (except for the occasional treat or to allow him to be social). Overall, kids' activity levels are down and their consumption of high-fat and high-calorie packaged and prepared foods is up and we all know what it's doing to their weight, general health, self-confidence and well-being.
If tobacco companies can't market to kids because their products are known to be addictive and unhealthy, why is the same not true for food companies? If Joe Camel can't be used to promote cigarettes, why can the likes of Shrek be used to promote sugary cereals and high-fat snacks?
via [Blogging Baby]
3M's new street advertisement for its Security Glass is bold, creative and shows what you can do when your product is just that good.
via [Seth's Blog]
Interesting article in The New York Times about Wal-Mart's upgraded in-store television network, the reach it has with shoppers/viewers (average shopper watches seven minutes per store visit) and how much advertisers are willing to pay ($137,000 - $292,000 for a four week rotation of a single ad).
The New York Times has published website traffic data for companies that advertised during the Super Bowl as compared to their average of the four previous Sundays. I am unable to capture the link to the pop-up screen that displays the graph on NYT.com, so here is a copy of the graph.
(click to enlarge)
Very interesting. I'd be curious to see how this compares to other television advertising, like a new primetime ad buy, for instance.
If you can't wait until Sunday or just want a heads-up on what to look forward to, MediaPost has a preview of the upcoming Super Bowl ads, quarter by quarter. Great stuff.
Being much more of an advertising and media junkie than a hard-core sports fan, I have always more looked forward to the Super Bowl ads than the game itself. But, this year my Eagles (through I now call Portland home, I grew-up in Philly) are forcing me to split my enthusiasm. All the more reason to look forward to Sunday.
via [Adrants]
American Online and Mobile 365 are offering cross-platform wireless customers a way, for a 50-cent fee, to vote for their favorite Super Bowl ad via text messaging. According to Wireless Week, "texted votes will be tallied as part of the AOL Super Sunday Ad Poll, which will be released on Monday following the game." THQ Wireless is also teaming with the NFL again this year to offer fans the ability to vote for the MVP via text messaging.
via [Adverblog]
Many readers of this blog learned of it from references to the Perception Analyzer® in the PBS documentary, "The Persuaders." I first referenced it in this previous post and if you missed the show, you now have two ways to check it out online:
View the entire 90-minute documentary.
View "Give Us What We Want," the 13-minute segment featuring the Perception Analyzer.
It was just a couple of nights ago that I was watching TV and noticed how many commercials were portraying men as complete idiots. Clueless fathers, insensitive husbands, slacker employees...you name it. Today, The New York Times takes on the topic with this article which notes, "the 'man as a dope' imagery has gathered momentum over the last decade, and critics say that it has spiraled out of control. It is nearly impossible, they say, to watch commercials or read ads without seeing helpless, hapless men."
As most of you men out there will certainly attest, we are dopes a good amount of the time. But, we are also great fathers, loving husbands and diligent employees. I agree with Martyn Straw's (chief strategy officer at BBDO Worldwide) statement that, "there is the notion that things that are 'negative' are always much funnier than 'positive,' which can get very schmaltzy." I also think creatively poking fun at people and groups can be funny and does not necessarily have be to construed as negative or "bashing" if done right. But, this trend of railing on men seems to be getting a little old and maybe it's time to ratchet-up the creativity once again.
Budweiser supposedly created an ad for this year's Super Bowl that depicts how Janet Jackson's outfit was torn backstage before last year's halftime show by someone using the rubberized garment to help twist open a bottle of Bud. Yesterday, Budweiser and FOX "agreed" not to air the spot, but today Budweiser released the ad on its website. You too can view the ad here.
Personally, I have my doubts as to whether this ad was ever intended to
air during this year's big game. While it's a clever idea and
certainly humorous (to me, at least), I don't see how, after last
year's ruckus, Budweiser would have ever imagined this could air.
Honestly, I think they'll get much more mileage out of the story about
the ad not running, and the flood of people who will watch it online,
then if it ever aired. If I hadn't already put my whole allowance
down on the game itself, I'd wager a hefty sum that this was the intent
all along. And if I'm right, that's some effective marketing
right there.
UPDATE: My wife just pointed out to me that the spot is only 15-seconds and to our knowledge, Super Blow spots are only sold as 30-seconds or longer. If correct, that's another strong indicator
that this ad was never meant for TV.
Following the death of Johnny Carson last week, there is an interesting article in The New York Times about how much less obtrusive and more effective product placements seemed in the old days of television (including on The Tonight Show) as opposed to shows of today. Worthy read.
Just when you thought everything that could be used for adverting had been, along comes FlapMedia, a company that sells advertising on truck mud flaps. Honestly, not a bad idea. I mean, why not, right? Question is, what will be the next flat service to be covered with advertising?
via [Adfreak]
Nielsen Entertainment Group to begin providing videogame measurement and ratings in 2005.
via [Adverblog]
If you were schizophrenic, would this billboard help you? What would you read first, the plethora of horizontal text or the oh so helpful vertical text? What does that fine print in the middle say? Which phone number would you call? What's with the lava flow or whatever that is? Perhaps instead of the tag line "Have Your Been Diagnosed With Schizophrenia?" it should read "Want To Become Schizophrenic? Read On."
via [Brand Autopsy]
NBC is reportedly going to begin selling products featured in product placements as well as star's wardrobe and accessories featured in NBC Universal shows. I also read the other day, though I can't remember where, that companies featured in tasks on The Apprentice are paying up to $2 million to be part of the show and have some creative input into the tasks.
With the effectiveness of traditional 30-second ads being called into question more and more these days, it's fascinating to see all these alternative forms of promotion take shape.
via [Agenda Inc.]
Here are a few TV viewing stats that speak to what people do when they watch television. Nothing groundbreaking, but we love new stats, right?!?
So, a couple of days ago news breaks
that TiVo will begin displaying logos and banner ads to viewers who
fast forward through commercials. Buzz about this has been
predominantly negative (to say the least). While more level heads
may prevail and some may even decide it won't be as bad as first
suspected, shouldn't TiVo have seen this coming? TiVo customers
are still early adopters - fanatics - people who use the word "love" to
describe their state-of-the-art electronic devices. This story
should not have first come out in a newspaper,
it should have been communicated directly and accurately to loyal TiVo
customers
through their TiVo devices. It could have been a message from the
president of the company to all of his customers explaining what they
are planning, why and how it won't suck. Word would have spread
like crazy (just as it did this way), but TiVo could have controlled
the story and allied with its customers as opposed to letting them
learn in the press about something that reads like a betrayal (even if
in the end it may not be). Instead, rumors are flying and how
these banners and logos are really going to work is unclear. What
is clear is that TiVo customers are pissed (by what they're hearing,
even if it's inaccurate) and confused.
To make matters worse, it's now been two days since the story broke and nowhere on the TiVo website can I find word one about it. Not on the I Have TiVo page. Not on the Press Releases page. Not on the TiVo in the News page. Nowhere. Come on! This is PR 101. Control your news story. Even if they didn't anticipate the backlash (which if they know their customers would not be possible), react swiftly and get out in front of it. They need to talk to their customers and future customers and not let the negative buzz machine keep on chugging. It's now at the point where they probably need to put it on the homepage.
TiVo recently announced advertiser billboards and opt-in logos that will appear on-screen when viewers fast forward through commercials. While this will surely please advertisers struggling to reach trigger-happy viewers, I can't imagine TiVo's fanatic customers are going to be all too happy.
My first reaction is that it's not TiVo's job to appeal to advertisers. It's TiVo's job to appeal to its customers - viewers who pay $100-$200 for receivers and $13 per month for service. I can see TiVo selling viewership data (also referenced in the article) so advertisers and programmers may better understand people's viewing habits, but aligning with advertisers to circumvent the ad skipping that TiVo made possible (and extremely popular) in the first place is likely to leave customer feeling cheated.
via [PVRblog]
The Advertising Research Foundation surveyed leading advertising professionals regarding what effect they feel DVRs will have on 30-second TV spots. Fifty-five percent expect "significant growth of non-traditional ad formats, but 30-second spot will remain cornerstone of TV advertising." Twenty-one percent predict the "death of the 30-second spot and dramatic transformation of TV advertising paradigm." Read on for more stats...
via [eMarketer]
Last night PBS aired "The Persuaders" on Frontline, a documentary which looked at how changes in marketing practices are influencing U.S. culture and politics. It also looked at how advertisers are trying to break through the clutter that they have created, looking for new ways to reach potential consumers.
In a segment on political research, the Perception Analyzer® was featured and a link to this blog on the Frontline website (last link under 'The Persuasion Industry' section) has resulted in, by far, this weblog's highest traffic day ever.
For anyone who missed the show, it will be available to view online on Friday, November 15.
According to Engadget, CNET has reported that Texas Instruments says 70% of cellphones will have digital TV tuners by 2007. Should this prophecy come to pass, what might this hold for the advertising industry? Will we see specially designed commercials optimized for television viewing via mobile devices? I think the answers is undoubtedly, YES!
Considering all the ad-zapping associated with DVR viewing of television, advertising via mobile device could be the next frontier.
It's an in-game ad kind of day. Massive Inc. announces its launch of the "world's first" video game advertising network. Here's how it works:
"The technology backbone behind the Massive Video Game Advertising Network is Massive's patent pending ad serving technology, a client-server system that dynamically delivers advertising into video games within the Massive Network, and measures and reports results. Once integrated into a game, the Massive client library pulls down advertising from the Massive Server in the background of game play and reports every time an ad is seen. Massive manages ad campaigns on the back-end to meet advertiser requirements such as airing ads only during Primetime or on Sunday nights, or to specific segments within the network, as well as to ensure reach and frequency goals are met. The entire process is invisible to the player and optimized so as to not impede game play or online performance."
via [Adverblog]
Mediaweek reports on a deal between Nielsen Entertainment and Activision to measure how long and how often players are exposed to brands placed in video games. Surveys will also be conducted to understand player's perception of ads in video games and how it effects brand awareness and recall.
via [MarketingVOX]
MarketingVOX references a recent study by Media Planning Group finding that "nine out of ten respondents said they usually or always skip [television] ads - even with live programming - when they use their digital video recorders (DVRs)." Other data that is not necessarily in synch with these findings can be found here.
Dynamic Logic's second CrossMedia Forum provided for a great evening of lively debate between top executives representing the eight major media categories. Much of the debate was spurred on by nearly 200 members of the audience using Perception Analyzer® dials to respond to the question, "Which medium is facing the toughest road ahead?" The audience responded as follows:
Broadcast TV (35%)
Newspaper (28%)
Radio (11%)
Magazine (10%)
Direct Marketing (5%)
Cable TV (4%)
Outdoor / Out-of-Home (4%)
Internet (2%)
Many thanks to Dynamic Logic and the other sponsors for a great event. Onward to Round 3...
In honor of Advertising Week 2004, Yahoo! and USA Today conducted a survey of people's favorite advertising icons and slogans.
The winners are...
America's Favorite Icons, Top Five:America's Favorite Slogans, Top Five:
- M & M Characters®
- AFLAC Duck®
- Mr. Peanut®
- Pillsbury Doughboy®
- Tony the Tiger®
- Melts in your mouth, not in your hands. (M&M's)
- Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't. (Almond Joy/Mounds)
- Where's the beef? (Wendy's)
- A mind is a terrible thing to waste. (United Negro College Fund)
- Can you hear me now? (Verizon)
Proctor & Gamble reports that Crest's appearance on last week's episode of The Apprentice resulted in "the highest level of online interest in a single product launch in P&G history." With the offer of free samples and a contest for the best marketing idea submitted via the web site, "increased Web traffic started immediately after the show aired, with more than 800,000 hits in just two hours. In addition, more than 40,000 samples of the product were requested and more than 20,000 applicants submitted ideas on how they would have created buzz."
With the effectiveness of television advertising being questioned of late and advertisers moving more and more ad dollars to alternative outlets, this kind of paid placement is an example of creative marketing that may just pay off.
via [Lost Remote]
Some good thoughts over at Bold Approach blog about the impact DVR's are having on television advertising and how to make advertising better overall.
Dave also links to an interesting Forrester study that delves deeply into this topic.
For more info, I previously looked at this topic here, here and here.
Whether consuming multiple forms of media at the same time or just trying to consume all types of media faster, the way people interact with media is changing fast. This article at seattlepi.com sums it up very well. As I've previously addressed here and here, marketers and advertisers need to keep-up and find new ways of getting their messages through.
As an aside, I love the way a well written piece can make you feel the emotion and pace the author is trying to convey. I actually found myself speed reading this article without even thinking about it. Fun read.
In stark contrast to advertisers testing 90-second television commercials in order to get viewer's attention in a fast-forward world, the campaign of Indiana Governor Joe Kernan is running five-second ad bursts that convey quick, simple messages.
In a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't kind of way, the opposition is actually complaining about the uber-short ads, saying they "don't accurately portray Indiana's still-struggling economy." As Adrants points out, "One would think the opposition would be happy his opponent was buying less airtime."
This article by eMarketer highlights stats by Jupiter Research that predict online video ad spending will jump from $77 million in 2003 to $657 million in 2009. Online video ads first caught my attention back in May of this year, at which time I wrote this.
With DVR's (like TiVo) making television commercials easier to skip, people's attention split through media multitasking and broadband penetration leading to less time spent watching TV, it's no surprise that advertisers are taking their messages where the eyeballs are - online.
With 38.4% compound annual growth over the last five years and revenues expected to grow from $470 million in 2004 to more than $1 billion in 2008, cinema advertising is the fastest-growing ad medium. I'll tell you, after watching "The 2wenty" for a while now at Regal cinemas and thinking of all those years of listening to crappy music and watching still images flash on the screen, this doesn't surprise me one bit.
via Lost Remote
Must read article from Wired on how the media consumption behavior of 18-34 males is changing the world advertising and how companies sell to us.
As another means of busting through the clutter and holding onto fast-forward-happy DVR viewers, companies are trying 90-second television commercials, according to this article in The New York Times (free subscription required).
We previously touched on the advertising challenges posed by DVR's in this post.
Two great links today via Experience Economy Evangelist:
The first is the cover story of the July 12 Business Week that profiles, in depth, the shift from mass market advertising and marketing to micromarketing and highly targeting campaigns. This is a must read!
The second is an Atlanta Business Chronicle profile of The Coca-Cola Co's. slow and steady shift from the traditional 30-second TV ad to more "alternative marketing." Coke has been getting a lot of attention for this lately and being one the world's strongest brands with a $2 billion marketing budget, we'll all surely be interested to see how this effort further develops.
New study reports on current in-home TV technology numbers:
- DVRs in 4% of homes (up 100% in 6 months)
- HDTV in 6% of homes (up 50% in 6 months)
- Dual DVD/VHS decks in 18% of homes
- TV tuners in PCs in 5% of homes
I'm actually surprised HDTV is slightly out-pacing DVRs, but that DVR number is no doubt going to take off in the coming months. Advertisers better get ready.
via Lost Remote
Interesting New York Times article about television ads being aired contextually, based on programming and viewer conditions. For instance, The Weather Channel will offer the ability to run TV ads based on the viewer's weather conditions such as, "sending commercials for rugged trucks to rainy parts of the country while simultaneously sending commercials for convertibles to those viewers getting sun."
Experience Economy Evangelist points to a Business Week article that profile's Coca-Cola Co's new hang-out called Coke Red Lounge. It's an environment where consumers can experience music, movies, videos and all things Coke.
Interesting stat in the article is that due to media fragmentation and the proliferation of DVR's (like TiVo), "megamarketers [like Coke] can now hit no better than 15% of the population with an ad in prime time -- far less than the 40% reached as recently as the mid-1980s."
As a follow-up to this post I refer you to this article in The Hollywood Reporter regarding results of a new TV viewership study that includes data on DVR viewing habits.
Key stats:
DVR penetration is expected to be "6% of domestic TV households by year's end""...after TV watchers start using their new DVR, the amount of time they watch television per week increases 24% from an average of 19.2 hours to 23.9 because the device reduces the need for irritating channel-surfing..."
"...even while skipping through commercials, only 33% of DVR users report that they rarely or never notice the brands being advertised...65% always or sometimes notice them"
"...nearly 55% of DVR users have found themselves rewinding or pausing a TV commercial in order to better understand the advertised product"
The article goes on to discuss how even though DVR watchers tend to fast-forward through ads, they don't walk away from the TV like non-DVR watchers. So, even the passing imagery of an ad has more impact than no imagery at all. It also points out how advertisers are working to make ads more effective in reaching fast-forwarding DVR watchers by using such tactics as:
"...30-second ads that keep the brand logo or a discount offer on the screen throughout so that viewers who hit the fast-forward button might still get a clear sales or brand message; ultrashort commercials designed to end by the time users can grab the remote and fast-forward; and three-minute ads that masquerade as content, encouraging users to record them daily."
As a follow-up to this post I refer you to this article in the June 28, 2004 issue of Time magazine (p. 52 of the print version) in which video games, online games, web sites and products that market and advertise to kids are profiled.
One of the online games profiled is Neopets. According to the article, kids have the opportunity to "purchase" brand name products (such as Oreo cookies, Nestlé SweeTarts and Laffy Taffy candy) with points in order to feed their online pets. Kids can also win points by watching ads and movie trailers.
The article goes on to cite that kid's marketing is a $15 billion business that is targeting the "$40 billion in pocket money that they [children under 13] spend on purchases from candy to clothes..."
Interesting article in the June 2004 issue of Business 2.0 (page 78 of the print version - subscription required to read online) about a strategy used by advertising agency Zimmerman & Partners which they call "brandtailing." The concept is to first uncover the underlying reasons why people don't buy (at all or as much as their clients would like) and assist their clients in addressing those issues. Then they build call-to-action campaigns and use tracking software to determine what ads have resulted in sales.
What is unique here is that while most ad agencies seem more focused on building messages around their client's current situations, Zimmerman & Partners first try to help their clients improve their offerings, then pitch it to potential customers and closely track the results. The concept of being able to track revenue generated from advertising campaigns and thereby actually show ROI is something the salesguy in me can really appreciate.
While it does not provide much in the way of specifics (though I'm sure there will be much more about this in the coming months), this Reuters article highlights Viacom's interest in advertising in video games.
I'm not a gamer and don't really know how much, if any, of this is already going on. Should we be expecting product placements (i.e. game characters drinking a Pepsi), billboards in game landscapes, trailers before the game loads (like we see on DVDs)? I imagine the possibilities are endless and the demographic is certainly appealing. Has anyone experienced ads in games yet?
Here is a post from productmarketing.com, a blog I recently discovered, that discusses what's wrong with a lot of advertising today and offers some good suggestions for improvement.
Thanks to Amanda at Extensis for the link.
An article in the July 2004 issue of Inc. magazine (page 42) discusses how text messages to cell phones are being used to advertise and market to consumers. They reference a specific example of a shopping mall having collected cell phone numbers from 2000 shoppers (presumably by having them opt-in to receive text messages from the mall) who then began receiving text messages with special offer messages like "Twenty percent off at the register" or "Free appetizer when you dine with a friend." The text message then gets exchanged, at the mall's information desk, for a paper coupon to be redeemed in stores and restaurants.
What's remarkable is that they claim "80% of all text screen coupons were converted." Now, they don't say how many converted coupons were redeemed, but they do say that "the tenants that participated all saw a jump in their sales."
I like the idea in limited doses. No one wants to get tons of text messages, with their cell phones going off all the time, even if they did opt-in. But, occasional targeted offers would be good and convenient. Of course, the greatest concern is that this goes the way of email SPAM and we start getting stuff we didn't ask for. There are no SPAM filters for text messages...yet!
Since we're on a roll with this topic today, here's an article from The New York Times that suggests TV add spending could be down as much as $100 million to $300 million for the upcoming 2004-5 season.
Interestingly, as a follow-up to the last post, here is a post at Adrants that summarizes a survey by the Association of National Advertisers asking marketers about their opinions on print media as an advertising outlet. Amid many interesting stats is also the fact that one of the top three things marketers feel are the greatest threats to print advertising is "the Internet as an alternative source of information."
As a follow-up to this post, here is an article from Media Life magazine, courtesy of Lost Remote, that helps explain the increase in online ad spending and from where the ad dollars are coming.
More data to support the fact that people's media-consumption is becoming more and more splintered. Television ad premiums will certainly continue to be challenged if the audience's attention is that diverted, further justifying advertiser's intent to move ad dollars from television to other media outlets.
As a follow-up to this post, here's a good article on where the industry sees this going.
In this post we referenced how, partially due to the proliferation of DVRs (digital video recorders), more advertisers are moving parts of their advertising dollars to media outlets other than television. Today, Lost Remote links to an article about a study that suggests 96% of DVR viewers stick through commercial breaks as opposed to the 49% of non-DVR viewers (claiming the other 51% of non-DVR viewers flip around to other channels during commercial breaks). The caveat in the article that, in my opinion, makes the statistic worthless is, "96 percent of those viewers actually watch TV commercials when they become DVR subscribers, albeit in fast-forward mode."
I have a DVR (TiVo) and fast forward through commercials at the fastest fast forward speed and I can tell you that I have absolutely no idea what any of those ads are. Even though the article claims that, "mo
