The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Digital TV and Advertising
NakedZergling
A more apocalyptic post apocalypse Portland OregonRegistered User regular
A more apocalyptic post apocalypse Portland OregonRegistered User regular
So i was watching Blue Planet when the old lady asks me to do some dishes. "when this show is done i'll do it." was the response i gave. The one that has served me so well in the past. Naturally she picks up the controller and records the show and my excuse is void.
Now i've only had digital cable for a year or so, same with the dvr feature. I have noticed that like most people with it, i just set the box up to record what i want to watch, and watch it when i have time. The best part is forwarding through the commercials. I realize that i see commercials less and less (on tv anyway), and with technology getting better and better we can almost eliminate them.
This has created a huge surge on product placement within shows and even some shows being sponsored solely by one or two companies. (like nissan in heroes)
So what i was wondering while scrubbing the dishes was this. Might there be a time when Companies just start buying channels and running only their ads? The idea isn't too bad. "the Coke channle".....Imagine watching whole episodes of say "the Office" with 6 min of coke ads or whatnot between episodes instead 4 commercial breaks during one.
Could this idea even work?
Now i've only had digital cable for a year or so, same with the dvr feature. I have noticed that like most people with it, i just set the box up to record what i want to watch, and watch it when i have time. The best part is forwarding through the commercials. I realize that i see commercials less and less (on tv anyway), and with technology getting better and better we can almost eliminate them.
This has created a huge surge on product placement within shows and even some shows being sponsored solely by one or two companies. (like nissan in heroes)
So what i was wondering while scrubbing the dishes was this. Might there be a time when Companies just start buying channels and running only their ads? The idea isn't too bad. "the Coke channle".....Imagine watching whole episodes of say "the Office" with 6 min of coke ads or whatnot between episodes instead 4 commercial breaks during one.
Could this idea even work?
NakedZergling on
0
Posts
Ask yourself this question: do you find yourself more likely to buy a Nissan after seeing it on Heroes?
Does anyone?
I think the effect that sort of thing creates is largely the opposite: people are annoyed at the intrusion, i.e. the intrusive way the product is marketed.
The fact is that TV advertising is extremely inefficient and ineffective and it is getting more so everyday. It's just like spam; either you ignore it by changing the channel, or you filter it out by recording the show and fast-forwarding during the commercials.
Now, compare this to context-based advertising. You do a search on Google with the keyword "holiday resorts in Hawaii" and on the side comes up three or four ads with links to travel sites. You're far more likely to click those types of ads than, say, those annoying flashing banner ads that claim you're the 10,000th visitor and won.
In the future I expect TV commercials to mostly disappear.
No, they need more hits than "a few" because airtime on TV is extremely expensive.
Otherwise it's just inefficient as shit, and a complete loss of money when you factor in the opportunity cost.
I'm getting married in october and you start to notice stuff for honeymoons or wedding even places.
Then in other situations I get a little worried - when I was off work for a bit I watched some daytime TV and the amount of loan/credit card/loan consolidation/price comparison website advertising was simply amazing
Marketers are starting to realize that instead of spamming the masses and hoping to get a few hits, it makes far more sense to market your product to people that you know are looking for it, because it costs far, far less, and you get more hits per ad.
Bingo.
I used to think like ege, until I had a group of marketers explain it better to me.
Although there is movement in the industry towards much more targeted advertising that gets much more "bang for their buck" so to speak, mass-scale advertising is still a necessity. Mostly because a wide majority of the world's brand names need to constantly be in the eye of the public in order to retain their brand awareness.
Take Nissan as an example, simply because it was used earlier. If you stopped seeing Nissan ads everywhere, you'd probably think the company fell off the face of the earth. So when it came time to actually purchase a car, you may not even consider them, because you weren't exposed to the name at all in the last few years. They can try and target you once you're looking for a car all they want, but for many markets, it just won't work if you haven't been exposed to the brand at all for some time.
People tend to forget that the sole purpose of advertising isn't to get you to "run out and buy their product" anymore. It's much much more than that nowadays.
It's not about whether or not advertising, when watched, is effective.
It's about the fact that most people don't watch TV ads anymore. They change the channel, they fast-forward, they just tune themselves out.
Here are a some articles and blog posts talking about why TV advertising is dying.
Is Advertising Dead?, by Guy Kawasaki
A blog post about monopolies and traditional marketing, by Seth Godin
Excerpt:
One of Seth's presentations.
Youtube Up, TV Down
It's pretty obvious that TV advertising is not as effective as it used to be, and it's only getting less so everyday.
People don't buy BMW because they see the ads on TV. They buy BMW because BMW makes good cars.
Sure, on average people may lean towards brands they see on TV, but the fact is, they no longer watch those ads.
I'm not sure what the situation is at the moment though, as I haven't really watched TV for a couple of years. I've migrated to just getting dvd-sets of series I want to see, as it removes the wait and commercials and so forth.
Large-scale advertising does have an effect, but I think that it's not as significant as advertisers might think. With markets where the goods compete mainly with brands, like cars, the advertising is needed simply for brand exposure. As said already in this thread, the inability to keep the masses aware of the brand's existence would hurt their sales.
Don't networks rely very heavily on sponsors to fund their shows?
They do. That's why TiVo et al were under legal attack by TV networks. People not watching the commercials profoundly hurt their ad rates.
But that doesn't necessarily mean networks will disappear due to lack of funding. I expect the smart ones to find other ways, perhaps by using the Internet to promote television.
Something like Google suggested.
Marketers know their advertising is getting less effective due to oversaturation. They have been saying that since at least the 1980s. So far, it just means people spend even more money on marketing. Although nontraditional viral marketing has kind of come into being, companies still spend rising amountsof cash on traditional campaigns. So I don't personally see anything changing anytime soon.
I wish I could dig up that article, I think it was on slashdot a couple months ago. It was pretty interesting.