Advertising
- Confidence Index Drops to 50.4
- Small Type on Television
- Unreadable Billboard Copy
- Newspaper Ads in Deep Decline
- An Airline Named Derrie-Air
- Honda Skydiving Commercial
- Cause Marketing ROI
- Advertising Agency Competition
- Drug Placements in TV Programs
- $3 Million for Super Bowl Spots?
Confidence Index Drops to 50.4
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
The Conference Board described its June 2008 report as "dismal." Business, job and income expectations were all down.
The Conference Board had more bad news for advertisers in late June, announcing that its monthly Consumer Confidence Index had plunged another 7.7%. That was its fifth lowest level ever. The index fell from 58.1 in May to 50.4 in June, just over half its 100 base in 1985.
Even more discouraging, the Board said its Expectations Index fell from 47.3 in May to 41.0 in June, an all-time low.
"Perhaps the silver lining to this otherwise dismal report is that Consumer Confidence may be nearing a bottom," the Board said in its monthly report June 24.
Other consumer opinions from its June survey:
Source: Conference Board News Release June 24, 2008
Even more discouraging, the Board said its Expectations Index fell from 47.3 in May to 41.0 in June, an all-time low.
"Perhaps the silver lining to this otherwise dismal report is that Consumer Confidence may be nearing a bottom," the Board said in its monthly report June 24.
Other consumer opinions from its June survey:
- Business conditions are "bad"-- 32.5%, up from 29.7%
- Business conditions are "good"-- 11.5%, down from 13%
- Job are "hard to get"-- 30.5%, up from 28.3%
- Jobs are plentiful – 14.1%, down from 16,1%
- Business conditions will worsen over the next six months -- 33.9%, up from 32.9%
- Business conditions will improve--8.8%, down from 10.6%
- Expect fewer jobs in the months ahead -- 35.5%, up from 32.3%
- Expect more jobs -- 8%, down from 9.0%
- Expect their incomes to increase -- 12.3%, down from 14.1%
Source: Conference Board News Release June 24, 2008
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Lawyers are probably talking to one another in those unreadable messages that flash on our TV sets and they don’t want us to know what they’re saying.
The ruckus being raised over disclosure notices for television product placements raises a broader question: Who can, or needs to, read all that small type that runs on TV?
The Federal Communications Commission has issued a notification of proposed rulemaking on product placements. Right now the FCC allows the disclosures for such advertising to be run in small print along with the credits at the end of the programs.
Four Percent for Four Seconds
At least one FCC commisson acknowledges that most viewers never see the notices. The agency may require the product disclosures to be similar to those for political sponsors, which must run for four seconds and be displayed in type at least four percent of the height of the television screen. On a typical 51-inch screen, that’s about one inch high.
Four seconds is probably long enough and four percent is probably large enough to read if you’re really looking for the information. It’s like the small print in insurance policies; it’s there to cover legal obligations but not necessarily to be read.
Writers Want ‘Real Time’ Disclosures
The Writers Guild of America, whose members don’t like being pressured to write products into their scripts, have a bolder, unrealistic recommendation for the FCC: Run the product disclosures in "real time" at the bottom of the screen.
"X-Company paid us to show X-brand of cola in the above scene."
Networks, programmers and advertisers flash a lot of other small type on the screen that hardly anyone can read. As we learned from newspaper and magazine ads, small print in advertising is mostly lawyer talk, but it can be important. To see what they’re saying in the TV small print, we’ll have to tape, pause and squint at it.
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Here are a few billboard observations made while driving across a couple of states.
Some organizations seem to be wasting money on billboards these days, some by writing too much copy, some by trying to be too clever and some by violating basic graphic rules. Writing great billboard ad copy is not easy, but following a few elementary guidelines will at least produce readable advertising.
We saw numerous violations of those guidelines while driving across a couple of states recently.
Clever But Unredable Copy
One billboard said: "Not dumped yet?" That got our attention, but even driving at a legal 70 miles per hour on the Interstate, we were unable to read the rest of the story, including the name of the advertiser. We doubt those drivers passing us at 80 mph could read it either. Reading speed does not necessarily match driving speed.
Another board said: "The ‘T’ stands for luxury." We assume the advertiser’s name started with a "T" but we were not able to read it.
In both of these cases, the clever headlines were in large readable type. But the rest of the messages, including the advertisers’ names, were too small to be read in the few seconds we were able to devote to the billboard.
Those are common problems. There are so many billboards out there now that they compete for the few seconds that we can (or should) shift our eyes off the road in all that fast-moving traffic.
Keep It Short, Big and Simple
Even when traffic was slower and less adventurous, ad experts recommended billboard copy be limited to seven words. Many advertisers ignore that rule these days.
Suggestion: Keep the copy short. Keep it big, especially the name. Keep the graphics simple.
Billboard companies can provide help in designing readable boards. Clients can help themselves by listening to their advice.
Mobile Billboard Advertising
We saw numerous violations of those guidelines while driving across a couple of states recently.
Clever But Unredable Copy
One billboard said: "Not dumped yet?" That got our attention, but even driving at a legal 70 miles per hour on the Interstate, we were unable to read the rest of the story, including the name of the advertiser. We doubt those drivers passing us at 80 mph could read it either. Reading speed does not necessarily match driving speed.
Another board said: "The ‘T’ stands for luxury." We assume the advertiser’s name started with a "T" but we were not able to read it.
In both of these cases, the clever headlines were in large readable type. But the rest of the messages, including the advertisers’ names, were too small to be read in the few seconds we were able to devote to the billboard.
Those are common problems. There are so many billboards out there now that they compete for the few seconds that we can (or should) shift our eyes off the road in all that fast-moving traffic.
Keep It Short, Big and Simple
Even when traffic was slower and less adventurous, ad experts recommended billboard copy be limited to seven words. Many advertisers ignore that rule these days.
Suggestion: Keep the copy short. Keep it big, especially the name. Keep the graphics simple.
Billboard companies can provide help in designing readable boards. Clients can help themselves by listening to their advice.
Mobile Billboard Advertising
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Since newspaper advertising has now dropped eight straight quarters, the questions are: How low can it go? And when will it stop bleeding?
American newspaper ad sales dropped another 14 percent in the first quarter of 2008, prompting the questions: How low can it go? And where’s the bottom?
It was the eighth straight quarterly loss and the largest quarterly drop ever recorded by the Newspaper Association of America.
The dollar volume fell to $8.43 billion, which sounds like a lot of advertising—until it is divided among all the nation’s local, regional and national papers.
The decline was led by 35 percent drops in newspaper real estate and job advertising. Those were two of the sectors hardest hit by the nation’s economic slump. But Kip Cassino, a Williamsburg, Va., research director, told Bloomberg News that many of the newspaper losses were caused by advertisers switching dollars to their own websites.
According to Bloomberg, as many papers reported declining circulation, some print advertising dollars were also being diverted to other websites and cable television
Newspaper websites, which are being counted on to balance some of the print losses, attracted $804 million in advertising during the quarter. However, that was far below the billion-plus loss suffered in print ads. The website sales were up 7.2 percent, the smallest increase since the industry started recording the sales in 2004.
The 2008 first quarter newspaper ad losses follow record 9.4 percent losses for all of 2007.
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Philadelphia Media Holdings touts a "carbon-neutral" airline that plants trees with profits from its pound-based tickets. Then it says "smile, we’re pulling your leg."
It was a little late for an April Fool joke, but the Philadelphia newspapers jokingly ran June ads for a fictitious airline that supposedly charges its customers by their combined body and luggage weight. They named the airline Derrie-Air, a non-too-subtle reference to an often weighty section of the anatomy that the French call "le derriere."
"The more you weigh, the more you pay," said the June 5 ads in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News and the newspapers’ website.
According to the Associated Press, it was a one-shot, tongue-in-cheek campaign seemingly aimed at both obesity and global warming. It was conducted by Philadelphia Media Holdings, the owner of both papers, with the help of the Gyro ad agency.
Derrie-Air, according to the ads, priced its tickets on a sliding weight scale, figuring the more pounds people brought aboard, the more fuel it took to carry them, resulting in more global warming.
"We will plant trees in deforested acres around the world to absorb all the carbon that our planes release into the atmosphere," the ads said. "The practice, known as ‘carbon offsetting’ has been adopted by a diverse array of credible entities such as famous Hollywood actors and actresses."
The ads closed with a disclaimer that said "the Derrie-Air campaign is a fictitious advertising campaign created by Philadelphia Media Holdings to test the results of advertising in our print and online products and to stimulate discussion on a timely environmental topic of interest to all citizens…
"In other words, smile, we’re pulling your leg."
"The more you weigh, the more you pay," said the June 5 ads in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News and the newspapers’ website.
According to the Associated Press, it was a one-shot, tongue-in-cheek campaign seemingly aimed at both obesity and global warming. It was conducted by Philadelphia Media Holdings, the owner of both papers, with the help of the Gyro ad agency.
Derrie-Air, according to the ads, priced its tickets on a sliding weight scale, figuring the more pounds people brought aboard, the more fuel it took to carry them, resulting in more global warming.
"We will plant trees in deforested acres around the world to absorb all the carbon that our planes release into the atmosphere," the ads said. "The practice, known as ‘carbon offsetting’ has been adopted by a diverse array of credible entities such as famous Hollywood actors and actresses."
The ads closed with a disclaimer that said "the Derrie-Air campaign is a fictitious advertising campaign created by Philadelphia Media Holdings to test the results of advertising in our print and online products and to stimulate discussion on a timely environmental topic of interest to all citizens…
"In other words, smile, we’re pulling your leg."
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Honda, like many advertisers, uses a live television spot in a regular program to overcome the growing consumer practice of fast forwarding through commercials.
Honda must have set a series of records with its live skydiving commercial. Who else has risked the time, money, talent and safety to send two planes and 19 skydivers 14,000 feet into the air to spell its name for a live audience in another country?
Actually, the costly and dangerous H-O-N-D-A stunt was designed to introduce the Japanese carmaker's new slogan for its 2009 Accord: "Difficult is worth doing."
Difficult is one thing. Dangerous and sky-high expensive is something else. How dangerous was it? Well, one of the planes crashed, and a skydiver was killed, the next day on a completely different job that had nothing to do with Honda.
The three-minute Honda skydiving commercial was produced by the Wieden & Kennedy agency and Britian’s Channel 4. It was shot in the sky near Madrid and shown live to an audience of about two million on London’s Channel 4. Honda will now use the scene in recorded television spots for the new Accord.
The live spot was incorporated into a Channel 4 reality show. It was one more attempt by advertisers to overcome the growing consumer practice of fast forwarding past commercials.
The skydiving commercial was also in keeping with Honda’s reputation for producing very different commercials, a reputation built on what Ian Armstrong, Honda’s manager for British communications, told the New York Times.
"Our job is to make good ads that people want to watch," he said.
References:
Actually, the costly and dangerous H-O-N-D-A stunt was designed to introduce the Japanese carmaker's new slogan for its 2009 Accord: "Difficult is worth doing."
Difficult is one thing. Dangerous and sky-high expensive is something else. How dangerous was it? Well, one of the planes crashed, and a skydiver was killed, the next day on a completely different job that had nothing to do with Honda.
The three-minute Honda skydiving commercial was produced by the Wieden & Kennedy agency and Britian’s Channel 4. It was shot in the sky near Madrid and shown live to an audience of about two million on London’s Channel 4. Honda will now use the scene in recorded television spots for the new Accord.
The live spot was incorporated into a Channel 4 reality show. It was one more attempt by advertisers to overcome the growing consumer practice of fast forwarding past commercials.
The skydiving commercial was also in keeping with Honda’s reputation for producing very different commercials, a reputation built on what Ian Armstrong, Honda’s manager for British communications, told the New York Times.
"Our job is to make good ads that people want to watch," he said.
References:
- Eric Pfanner, New York Times, June 6, 2008
- Honda.co.uk
- Weiden & Kennedy.com
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Some cynics see ulterior motives in cause marketing, but the growing number of projects indicate that it’s a win-win proposition for both the companies and the causes.
Though they are often accussed of ulterior motives, such as making money, corporations are now committing nearly $1.5 billion to cause marketing, the promoting of civic and charitable projects. Writer Jack Neff highlighted some of those programs in Advertising Age recently and it was an impressive list.
He summarized the good programs and then posed the question: Are the companies getting a return on their cause marketing? Neff acknowledged that hard numbers on the subject are hard to come by, but he came to two conclusions: Yes, the companies must be getting a good return on their investments simply because they continue to do it. Two, they are entitled and should make a profit on their cause marketing.
A spokesman for Global Marketing said its recent Pampers program with Unicef created "a tremendous impact on our business. When you do it in the right way, with the right tone and the right authenticity, consumers reward us for it," he said.
Advertising Being Used As An Educational Tool for Causes
Some of the companies support their programs with significant advertising and use their advertising as educational tools for their causes. Haagan Dazs, for instance, promoted its recent honeybee preservation program with national cable TV commercials, a spot on "60 Minutes" and with ads in magazines such as Gourmet and National Geographic.
According to Cause Marketing Forum.com, corporate spending on cause marketing in 2007 was estimated at $1.44 billion. That’s up 10.4% from 2006 and almost twice as much as it was in 2002.
Those numbers, plus the fact that Cause Marketing Forum was conducting its sixth annual conference at Chicago in May indicates that companies must feel good about their involvement in that segment of their advertising and marketing.
He summarized the good programs and then posed the question: Are the companies getting a return on their cause marketing? Neff acknowledged that hard numbers on the subject are hard to come by, but he came to two conclusions: Yes, the companies must be getting a good return on their investments simply because they continue to do it. Two, they are entitled and should make a profit on their cause marketing.
A spokesman for Global Marketing said its recent Pampers program with Unicef created "a tremendous impact on our business. When you do it in the right way, with the right tone and the right authenticity, consumers reward us for it," he said.
Advertising Being Used As An Educational Tool for Causes
Some of the companies support their programs with significant advertising and use their advertising as educational tools for their causes. Haagan Dazs, for instance, promoted its recent honeybee preservation program with national cable TV commercials, a spot on "60 Minutes" and with ads in magazines such as Gourmet and National Geographic.
According to Cause Marketing Forum.com, corporate spending on cause marketing in 2007 was estimated at $1.44 billion. That’s up 10.4% from 2006 and almost twice as much as it was in 2002.
Those numbers, plus the fact that Cause Marketing Forum was conducting its sixth annual conference at Chicago in May indicates that companies must feel good about their involvement in that segment of their advertising and marketing.
Advertising Agency Competition
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Number of agencies replaced or "on the bubble" illustrate volatility of ad industry.
Even in a slow week, the volatility of the advertising industry hits several major agencies and thousands of people in their pocketbooks. That’s evident year round when MediaPost Communications, an industry monitoring firm, issues its weekly list of corporations that are changing or planning to change advertising agencies. That’s comparable to a National Football League player or a network show being "on the bubble."
It doesn’t matter how long you’ve handled an account. It’s what-have-you-done-for-me-lately or can do for me tomorrow. It’s like being named coach of the year last year and being fired this year. They usually say it’s not personal (but often is), it’s just business.
The changes affect not only the agencies involved, but also subcontractors such as artists, printers, media buyers, models and all the other boutique firms that help produce ads, as well as their employees and employee families. The loss of a large account often means major job cuts.
In one relatively slow week in May 2008, MediaPost listed seven accounts valued at well over $200 million as being moved or "in review," which is like being "on the bubble."
The biggest appeared to be the $90 million Chivas Regal global creative account going from TBWA/Chiat /Day to Euro RSCG, an international network with offices in 233 cities in 75 countries.
Then there was the $60 million Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse account. Cramer-Krasselt was hired to handle the creative work and Initiative was hired to handle media planning and buying.
PetSmart put the creative work for its $40 million account "in review." Media Post said Leo Burnett would "defend" that account.
The values of the other four accounts were not listed but they probably ran well into the millions since they involved Quaker Oats, Michelin, TD Ameritrade and Tidy Cats.
Drug Placements in TV Programs
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Nielsen reports that drug manufacturers are turning to paid placements in programs as commercials lose effectiveness.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may soon be asked to regulate the paid placement of drug names in television programs, especially in medical shows like "Grey’s Anatomy."
A recent report from researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) raises concerns about the potential impact of such placements on patients and the general public. The report by Sony Ta, a clinical research fellow, and Dominick Frosh, an assistant professor of general internal medicine at UCLA, was published in the spring issue of the Journal of Public Policy and Marketing.
Although the FDA regulates the advertising of medications, it currently does not regulate the paid placement of drug names in programs because it does not consider such placements as advertising. According to Nielsen Product Placement, pharmacy companies are turning to program placements more than ever because studies have indicated that drug commercials have been generally ineffective.
Fortune Magazine reported in September 2007 that "Scrubs", "House" and "Grey’s Anatomy" led all shows in mentioning or displaying pharmaceutical products such as painkillers, Viagra, Botox and NuvaRing, a vaginal insert birth control device.
A website named Anxiety, Addiction and Depression Treatments said such television programs"routinely feature medical environments where sexy doctors and nurses drop references to brand-name drugs."
TV Product Placement
A recent report from researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) raises concerns about the potential impact of such placements on patients and the general public. The report by Sony Ta, a clinical research fellow, and Dominick Frosh, an assistant professor of general internal medicine at UCLA, was published in the spring issue of the Journal of Public Policy and Marketing.
Although the FDA regulates the advertising of medications, it currently does not regulate the paid placement of drug names in programs because it does not consider such placements as advertising. According to Nielsen Product Placement, pharmacy companies are turning to program placements more than ever because studies have indicated that drug commercials have been generally ineffective.
Fortune Magazine reported in September 2007 that "Scrubs", "House" and "Grey’s Anatomy" led all shows in mentioning or displaying pharmaceutical products such as painkillers, Viagra, Botox and NuvaRing, a vaginal insert birth control device.
A website named Anxiety, Addiction and Depression Treatments said such television programs"routinely feature medical environments where sexy doctors and nurses drop references to brand-name drugs."
TV Product Placement
$3 Million for Super Bowl Spots?
Posted by
Carroll Trosclair
Carroll Trosclair
Network seeking a 10% hike in ad rates although there's no guarantee the 2009 game can match the record 97.4 million viewers the Giants-Patriot battle drew.
NBC Universal will try to get $3 million for most 30-second television commercials during the 2009 Super Bowl, but advertisers may have reason to resist the hefty increase. The 2009 game is scheduled in Tampa February 1.
The Wall Street Journal reported in May 2008 that NBC will use $3 million as "the starting point for negotiations" with advertisers, 10% higher than any previous starting point. According to the Journal, prices for the spots traditionally increase about 5% per year.
The Fox network charged $2.7 million for most 30-second spots during the 2008 Super Bowl. Since the exciting New York Giants-New England Patriots game drew a record 97.4 million viewers the cost per viewer was about 2.7 cents. At $3 million per spot, the cost would be about 3.1 cents per viewer for the same size audience.
NBC is using the 2008 record audience as a selling point for the 2009 commercials, but advertisers aren’t guaranteed those numbers next year. The Giants-Patriot battle featured two of professional football’s most popular teams from two of the largest television markets in the nation, top ranked New York and the seventh-ranked Boston/Manchester area.
The odds of those same two teams making it back to the Super Bowl are extremely small. The only repeat match in Super Bowl history was the 1994 game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Buffalo Bills. They met in Pasadena in 1993 and again in Atlanta in 1994.
About half of the National Football League teams are located in television markets ranked 15th to 70th.
The Journal reported that major Super Bowl advertisers like Anheuser-Busch lock in lower rates by signing contracts for multiple spots over several years.
References: Matthew Futterman and Suzanne Vranica, Wall Street Journal, May 6, 2008; Downtown Magazine.com
The Wall Street Journal reported in May 2008 that NBC will use $3 million as "the starting point for negotiations" with advertisers, 10% higher than any previous starting point. According to the Journal, prices for the spots traditionally increase about 5% per year.
The Fox network charged $2.7 million for most 30-second spots during the 2008 Super Bowl. Since the exciting New York Giants-New England Patriots game drew a record 97.4 million viewers the cost per viewer was about 2.7 cents. At $3 million per spot, the cost would be about 3.1 cents per viewer for the same size audience.
NBC is using the 2008 record audience as a selling point for the 2009 commercials, but advertisers aren’t guaranteed those numbers next year. The Giants-Patriot battle featured two of professional football’s most popular teams from two of the largest television markets in the nation, top ranked New York and the seventh-ranked Boston/Manchester area.
The odds of those same two teams making it back to the Super Bowl are extremely small. The only repeat match in Super Bowl history was the 1994 game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Buffalo Bills. They met in Pasadena in 1993 and again in Atlanta in 1994.
About half of the National Football League teams are located in television markets ranked 15th to 70th.
The Journal reported that major Super Bowl advertisers like Anheuser-Busch lock in lower rates by signing contracts for multiple spots over several years.
References: Matthew Futterman and Suzanne Vranica, Wall Street Journal, May 6, 2008; Downtown Magazine.com