rbff advertising tracking study 2008 report l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
RBFF Advertising Tracking Study 2008 Report PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
RBFF Advertising Tracking Study 2008 Report

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14
Download Presentation

RBFF Advertising Tracking Study 2008 Report - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Download Presentation

RBFF Advertising Tracking Study 2008 Report

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. RBFF Advertising Tracking Study2008 Report O c t o b e r 2 0 0 8

  2. Background Recreational Boating & Fishing Foundation (RBFF), an independent, not-for-profit 501 (c) (3) organization, was formed to promote recreational angling and boating, as well as to increase awareness and appreciation of the need for protecting, conserving and restoring the nation’s aquatic resources. In 2001, the RBFF developed and launched the “Water Works Wonders” advertising campaign, targeted towards men between the ages of 25 and 54 who own fishing tackle and/or a type of boat appropriate for fishing. In 2005, the campaign was re-named “Take Me Fishing”, and females were added to the primary target. The 2008 campaign features print, radio, direct mail and online advertising. The campaign also features an informative website (www.takemefishing.org). In order to monitor advertising effectiveness, the RBFF has conducted an annual advertising tracking study. This report represents results from the 2008 study.

  3. Research Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this research study was to measure changes in “brand”/advertising awareness and attitudes/ perceptions over time. Specifically, the study was designed to monitor: Levels of awareness, trial and participation of recreational fishing and boating “Brand” attitudes and perceptions of boating and fishing Awareness, recall and effect of RBFF’s advertising and marketing communications Word of mouth “Brand” behavior

  4. Methodology Field work for the study was conducted using an online methodology. All interviewing was conducted on Russell Research’s survey website. A total of 1,620 interviews were conducted for the 2008 wave as follows: TotalMaleFemale Occasional 809 568 241 Lapsed 811 562 249 Total 1620 1130 490 Data for the study has been weighted to ensure a 70% male / 30% female representation. Additionally, the sample was distributed by census region as follows: Midwest 50% of sample Northeast 12.5% of sample South 22.5% of sample West 15% of sample Interviewing dates were as follows: Baseline wave was conducted from April 15 – 20, 2008. Post Wave was conducted from September 3 – 15, 2008.

  5. Methodology (Cont’d.) In order to qualify for study inclusion, respondents were screened to meet the following criteria: All Respondents Ages 25 – 54 Do not work in a competitive industry Employed full-time Annual household income of $50,000 - $150,000 Have Fished 2 or more times as an adult Extremely, very or somewhat likely to go fishing in the next 12 months Occasional Anglers Have fished 1 or 2 times in the past year, but not more than 3 times in the past 2 years Lapsed Anglers Have not fished in the past two years

  6. Sample Online sample for the study was randomly drawn from Survey Sampling’s SurveySpot online consumer panel. Survey Sampling is recognized as the premier sample provider in the market research industry. The SurveySpot panel currently has over 2.3 million panel households. The panel members are recruited using a wide variety of online and offline methods, including website registrations, email invitations and RDD telephone recruiting. For this research study, invitations were emailed to potential respondents targeted by gender, age, annual household income, employment status and geographic location. As an incentive to participate in the study, each respondent was entered into a monthly drawing with over $10,000 in prizes once the survey was completed.

  7. Study Comparability (2001-2002 vs. 2003-2008) Results of the 2003-2008 studies may not be comparable to the waves conducted in 2001 and 2002 due to changes in methodology. In the past, the study was conducted using a random-digit dialing telephone methodology. However, for cost and timing efficiencies, the study was changed to an online methodology. While we have found that in most consumer research studies telephone and online methodologies are comparable, we do not have empirical evidence which proves that no significant differences exist among this segment (anglers). In the post-wave, we will include results from previous waves when the data is determined to be comparable.

  8. Study Comparability (2003 – 2007 vs. 2008) In 2008, there were significant changes to the occasional and lapsed angler definitions. Addition of employment and household income restrictions Geographic distribution has been modified Future fishing intent added to the occasional anger segment Additionally, the advertising motivation questions were modified from a 6 to 12 month timeframe. Due to these changes, there may be significant differences in key metrics when compared to previous years. Changes made between the 2003 – 2007 waves: The definition of lapsed anglers was changed prior to the 2005 wave. While the modification was minor, it may account for some potential behavioral and attitudinal differences from previous years. Prior to the 2006 study, four attributes were merged to the main list. This may potentially have affected the comparability of these attitudinal statements to previous waves.

  9. Statistical Notation • The statistical significance of a result in this survey is the probability that the observed relationship (e.g., between variables) or a difference (e.g., between means) in a sample occurred by pure chance, and that in the population from which the sample was drawn, no such relationship or differences exist. Using less technical terms, one could say that the statistical significance of a result tells us something about the degree to which the result is "true". More technically, the value of the p-value represents a decreasing index of the reliability of a result. The higher the p-value, the less we can believe that the observed relation between variables in the sample is a reliable indicator of the relation between the respective variables in the population. Specifically, the p-value represents the probability of error that is involved in accepting our observed result as valid, that is, as "representative of the population." For example, a p-value of .05 (i.e.,1/20) indicates that there is a 5% probability that the relation between the variables found in our sample is a "fluke." • The following statistical notations are used throughout the report: • = Indicates figure is significantly higher than the indicated sub-group at a 95% confidence level (i.e. p-value of .05 or less).

  10. Key Findings

  11. Executive Summary • The results of the study indicate the 2008 Take Me Fishing advertising campaign was moderately successful in reaching its intended audience. • There was a significant increase in overall campaign awareness, with one in eight target anglers recalling at least one advertisement from the 2008 campaign. • Among specific angler segments, there was a significant increase among occasional anglers, while lapsed anglers experienced only a minor increase. • The increase was primarily driven by print advertising, which was recalled by 6% of respondents, including 8% of occasional anglers. • These awareness numbers were significantly lower than previous years, not unexpected for two primary reasons: • The 2008 campaign featured new creative (2003-2007 used the same advertising each year). • Advertising spending was reduced in 2008, with a focus on other communication efforts. 10

  12. Executive Summary Key Findings “TMF” Awareness - National PrePost Total 24% 26% Occasional 24% 28% Lapsed 24% 23% “TMF” Awareness – 30 Key States PrePost Total 23% 27% Occasional 22% 28% Lapsed 23% 25% • The 2008 campaign and communication efforts maintained awareness of the Take Me Fishing brand. • Nearly three in ten (28%) occasional anglers indicated awareness of the TMF brand, nearly identical to 2006 and 2007 awareness. One-quarter (23%) of lapsed anglers were aware of the brand, a significant decrease from 2007 although near equal to findings from 2005-06. • Awareness of TMF was slightly higher in the 30 states with increased efforts/communications focus in 2008 (27% in the 30 target states vs. 24% in the other 20 states). 11

  13. Executive Summary Key Findings Campaign Motivation - Fishing PrePost Total 50% 55% Occasional 56% 60% Lapsed 43% 50% Campaign Motivation – Fishing License Purchase PrePost Total 45% 51% Occasional 52% 52% Lapsed 39% 49% Campaign Memorability PrePost Total 44% 49% Occasional 48% 53% Lapsed 40% 46% Campaign Uniqueness PrePost Total 51% 57% Occasional 55% 59% Lapsed 48% 56% • Campaign diagnostics suggest the current TMF advertising can successfully motivate target anglers. • Three-fifths of occasional anglers and nearly one-half of lapsed anglers indicated the 2008 campaign would make them more likely to go fishing in the next year. Two-fifths of target anglers indicated the 2008 campaign would make them more likely to go fishing from a boat. These are stronger findings than in previous years. • The advertising also appears to motivate fishing license sales – a key communications objective. One-half of anglers indicated the TMF campaign would make them more likely to purchase a fishing license in the next 12 months, with one in five (18%) being much more likely. • One-half of anglers found the advertising to be extremely memorable and a majority indicated it was extremely unique, both very strong percentages for these metrics. 12

  14. Executive Summary Key Findings Print Likeability PrePost Total 71% 72% Occasional 76% 74% Lapsed 65% 71% Campaign Believability PrePost Total 56% 62% Occasional 61% 64% Lapsed 51% 58% Campaign Interest PrePost Total 36% 41% Occasional 42% 45% Lapsed 30% 37% • The TMF print advertising was well-liked among the target audience. Overall, seven in ten respondents indicated they liked it very much or somewhat. (Note: Likeability of advertising has been found to be the most accurate measure in determining which ads perform best in generating higher sales/participation by the Advertising Research Foundation. Generally, in advertising research, we look for a minimum of a 60% likeability rating to suggest an increase in sales/participation.) • The campaign was also widely viewed as believable, with two-thirds of occasional anglers and three-fifths of lapsed anglers indicated they found it very believable. • Two in five target anglers indicated they were very interested in the 2008 advertising. 13