Archive for the ‘TV Sponsorship’ Category

CONNECTED, CONVERGED…AND NO LONGER CONFUSED!

October 16th, 2012

Last week, I had the pleasure of presenting at the EGTA (European Group of Television Advertising) AGM in Paris. For those who don’t know EGTA, they represent commercial broadcasters across Europe (and, increasingly, Asia and Africa).  The UK’s broadcasters are woefully under-represented within EGTA membership, but the remaining 34 countries and 82 broadcasters in the house were treated to two days of thought-provoking and generally uplifting perspectives on TV’s connected future.

As convergence is happening before our very eyes – with screens syncing together in seamless harmony – so we are beginning to see just how TV’s connected future is shaping up. On the final day of EGTA’s AGM, three evangelists for the connected living room showed their wares. Bruno Peirera of The TV App Agency and Tej Rekhi from DG Mediamind provided compelling examples of how content jumps from screen to screen, making the communal personal and the personal communal. Meanwhile, Miles Lewis of Shazam, showed how broadcasters are already using their audio matching technology to promote programmes and advertisers to deepen engagement. And the simplicity of the convergence to the viewer – buy app and point smartphone at TV – is what will make experiences such as these work.

There has been a step change in the creative & digital industries over the last couple of years, with an emphasis moving from trying to replace television towards trying to work with it, by deepening engagement, furthering interactivity and enabling sharing. The key to this has been the second (and now third, fourth, fifth…) screens that have sprung up in living rooms across the land. They allow all of these enhancements to take place without disturbing the communal and immersive experience of ‘watching TV’. That is why the main role of connected TV’s – once they finally get connected – is not to channel the internet into the TV set, but rather to send TV to the internet. Once it’s there, people can do their own thing with it, on their own screen.  I’ve heard it described as red button on steroids, but this is another level to the clunky, limited red button experience.

Of course, with technologies like Shazam, the TV doesn’t even need to be connected.

Not only does this have implications for the effectiveness of individual spots, it can also change the whole nature of the break, as Miles demonstrated through Shazam’s work on this year’s Superbowl. You can see some examples here (http://shazamadvertising.com/view/mail?iID=WHVEPW5QDBWHG2W7NJVH).

It offers some powerful opportunities to broadcasters and advertisers alike, if they embrace the technology, each commercial break could be a mini-Superbowl experience. But I can’t help thinking that the advertising breaks will need to do all they can to keep their audience from Shazaming off somewhere else…at a single wave of their smartphone!

 

Online and over here

September 12th, 2011

A Thinkbox blog by David Brennan for Brand Republic

 February 19 2010

Amid the cutbacks and regulations that have hamstrung some advertising categories, there is one that has recorded rapid and continual growth in the money invested in advertising in general, and TV in particular. It is a category that has access to a wealth of data to evaluate the success of its marketing activities, much of it instantaneous. It has witnessed rapid growth in sales revenues and the number of brands entering the market. I am talking, of course, about online brands.

Yesterday morning, we held an event (and streamed it live online) looking at this phenomenon and exploring why it is happening and how best for online brands to use TV. We’ll be making it available on the Thinkbox website to watch in the coming weeks.

It is amazing to think that only five years ago this market category hardly appeared on the radar. In 2004 a total of 34 brands spent less than £10 million a year on TV. Last year the market was worth over £180 million to TV, with a total of 239 brands accounting for 5.5% of all TV advertising revenues; and that doesn’t include the 20+ programme sponsorships in which they also invested. It is an average annual growth rate of 172%.

Other media have also benefitted from this dynamic market, but it is TV where these online brands have invested the vast bulk of their money. In fact, TV accounted for nearly three quarters of their offline media spend in 2009.

There are many reasons for this. The complementary nature of TV and online means that TV drives online response better than any other media channel.  But it is not only response generation that is responsible for TV being the predominant marketing channel for online brands. It is TV’s ability to build brands, through fame and emotion, which has kept them coming back.

For brands that have little or no physical presence, the ability to create an emotional connection with its consumers becomes even more important. Meanwhile, the power of fame to create word of mouth, awareness and, most important of all, trust cannot be denied, as the 700,000 Facebook fans of Aleksandr the Meerkat would no doubt agree.

Also, the growing phenomenon of ‘two-screen viewing’ – concurrent consumption of TV and online – has helped facilitate response. A brand can go from initial awareness to purchase during the course of a single commercial break, making TV a point of sale medium in these circumstances. New research we’ve just carried out shows that 94% of the UK claims to have gone online as a direct result of something they’ve watched on TV in the last 12 months.

Consumers’ growing confidence online means they instinctively know where to go when a TV commercial engages them and creates demand for a product or service. Our growing arsenal of evaluation tools demonstrates TV’s significant role in this process more and more and online brands have been voting with their budgets.