Introduction to the cross media optimization study
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 54

Introduction to the Cross Media Optimization Study PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 88 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Introduction to the Cross Media Optimization Study. Robert Acquaotta Director, Advertiser Relations. Largest Cross Media Study Ever Conducted. Landmark study methodology assesses “Cost Effectiveness” of each Medium Scientifically evaluates real world, in-market campaigns

Download Presentation

Introduction to the Cross Media Optimization Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Introduction to the Cross Media Optimization Study

Robert Acquaotta

Director, Advertiser Relations


Largest Cross Media Study Ever Conducted

  • Landmark study methodology assesses “Cost Effectiveness” of each Medium

  • Scientifically evaluates real world, in-market campaigns

  • Marketers carefully considered methodology


Introducing the Participants

  • IAB: The organizing Association

  • Marketing Evolution/Rex Briggs: Developed landmark study methodology and executed the studies

  • Dynamic Logic: Applied AdIndex® product to collect consumer views and behavior

  • ARF (Advertising Research Foundation): Reviewed the study methodology

  • Forrester Research: Full analysis & review


State of The Union:Interactive Medium


Which trend matters to marketers?

16%

14%

12%

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

Percent of time spent Online by Users


Online Delivers the Audience

Fully Two Thirds of the Adult U.S. Population is Now Online

137 Million Consumers Online

Source: Harris Interactive, April 2002

Source: Harris Interactive, April 2002


…And their Usage Doubles Over Time

Source: eMarketer; UCLA Center for Communications Policy, November, 2001


In Fact, Essential to Consumer’s Lives

  • When was the last time you:

42% Travel Info/Mo.

21% Map Info

92% News At Work

26% Check Quotes

40% Not Decided

15% “Making New Friends”

30% “Competitive” Research

Source: Jupiter, eMarketer, Forrester, NetRatings


The Media Landscape Has Changed

Percent of adult evening viewers who

can name a brand

advertised watched

Source: NAB (1965-1986); Nielsen (2000)

Make bars in same colors


Perhaps you have questions about the Effectiveness of Online advertising…


1,000+ Ads Tested – Online Advertising Works!

+3.7

+5.9

+2.0

+2.1

Mean Changes for Four Measures of Effectiveness

Source: Dynamic Logic MarketNorms – Database of 400 campaigns

*All measures statistically significant at 99%; n=campaigns; between 375 and 416


The New Marketing Question

  • No longer talking about Why Online

  • Howto integrate

  • Specifically, how to integrate to maximize:

    • Brand Awareness

    • Brand Image

    • Purchase Intent & Sales


Key Findings from XMOS

The major findings of the Study to date


The Key Finding of the Study

  • Same budget Better results


Coverage

Effectiveness

Value

Why does Increasing Online produce better results within the same budget?

Online advertising is typically more cost efficient at producing branding gains

Online advertising affects branding metrics

Online reaches those who would otherwise not get the advertising message


Coverage

  • Media potholes

Coverage


75%

25%

Heavier TV

Not Reached

By TV

Coverage


Frequency Does Not Fall Evenly

LIGHTEST

HEAVIEST

15%

Frequency considered

wasteful

Frequency considered not helpful

Avg. Freq by Quintile


60%

40%

Heavier TV

Not Reached

By TV

Coverage

25%


Coverage

  • Media potholes!


Effectiveness and Value


Effectiveness and value

100

90

80

70

Diminishing returns

60

% Purchase intent

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Frequency: Number of OTS* ad exposures

*OTS = Opportunity to see advertisement based on GRP levels


Effectiveness and value

Internet

Branding effect

Television

Marketing spend


Coverage

Effectiveness

Value

  • Brand Awareness

  • Brand Image

  • Purchase preference


Growing Brand Awareness

The major findings of the Study to date


Growing Brand Awareness

  • Increasing Online is more cost effective way to build brand awareness


50%

45%

40%

Broadcast Only

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

6/3

6/5

6/7

6/9

6/11

6/13

6/15

6/17

6/19

*4 day moving average (for greater sample size stability)

Product Awareness

Aided awareness: Grilled chicken flatbread sandwich


60.0%

13.6%

Of budget

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

Online builds brand awareness

  • *Online advertising:

  • 60% reach/2.0 frequency

  • TV TRPs trimmed by approximately 20%

Point of diminishing returns

That’s a 3pt incremental branding gain for same budget


60%

InternetReach

6Million More Consumers Aware of the Product!

Awareness

=

or

The Affect

Optimizing for Brand Building

Recommendation


Coverage

Effectiveness

Value


Positioning the Brand Brand Image

The major findings of the Study to date


Building Brand Image

  • For McDonald’s Flatbread Sandwich…

    • “New”, “Different” and “Combination of great flavors”

  • For Dove Nutrium Bar…

    • “Nourishes your skin” and “is a for people like me”

  • For Colgate

    • “Long lasting protection” and “complete protection”

  • For Kleenex soft pack

    • “Convenient” and “innovative design”


Creative reinforced the core message across media

Cross-media synergy


“Just as each speaker accomplishes the same goal by exploiting its unique position and strength, each element of the marketing mix must find its strength and leverage it to surround the consumer with a synergistic and consistent message.”

“Surround Sound Marketing”


What about the 40% of your targetthat are not reached by TV?


The Kleenex® TV campaign


60%

40%

Campaign over 8 weeks

Heavier Online

25%

Heavier TV

Not Reached

By TV

Lighter TV

Lighter Online

Not Reached

By Online


Summary of branding gains among lightly reached / not reached TV audience

Positive Brand association (top box average)

Magazine and Online

Magazine (no online)

Online (no mag)

No Mag or Online


Coverage

Effectiveness

Value


Purchase Intent & Sales

The major findings of the Study to date


Results in a 14%increase in purchase intent

Same Budget, Better Results

Optimizing Online


Online + Offline(freq & 3.1)

14.2%

11.5%

Offline Only

Pre-campaign

8.7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Effectiveness and Value

Purchase intent (top 2 box)


Value

Value

Cost per person affected by advertising

Online + Offline

65

Offline Only

100

Pre-campaign

0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


All Media Demonstrate Diminishing Returns

Television

Online

Magazine

Average of Branding Metrics (%)

Number of advertising exposures


3.1 Impressions

(up from 1.7)

60%

Internet

Internet

TV

Print

2.0 impressions

(down from 2.6)

5.5 impressions (down from 6.0)

Optimizing the Dove Plan for Brand Building

Reach

Frequency

85%

50%

TV

Print

10%

10% in Original Plan


Colgate Total Toothpaste


Online ads increase purchase intentEffectiveness

Index of Improvement in Purchase Intent


Online is More Cost Effective than Other Media

Purchase Intent

Cost of Change by Other Media Indexed to Online

Effective TV and Print CPMs are compared and indexed to this number.


Overall, Online is the most cost efficient media

Cost per impact

Point gain over baseline is calculated by measuring the post branding level and subtracting the pre-campaign level (linear regression used to measure underlying trend). Costs per person impacted indexed against online advertising only and rank ordered.


  • +8%

  • Awareness

  • +7%

  • +34%

  • Brand Image

  • +14%

  • +20%

  • Purchase Intent

15%

13%

And more to come…

11%

Reco %Online:

10%

Base %Online:

7%

2%

2%

1%

Recap: Topline Brand Results

Results


Coverage

Effectiveness

Value


Key Takeaways

Same budget Better results


Thank You


  • Login