- Harvey and Harmony
- The Power of TV
- TV at a Glance
- TV Effectiveness
- TV Planning
- TV Toolbox
- TV Ad Galleries
- The Thinkboxes
- Screen Life: TV advertising everywhere
- Payback 4: pathways to profit
- #TVTwitter: how advertisers can get closer to conversations
- Screen Life: TV in Demand Summary
- TV Nation/Ad Nation: Attitudes, Behaviours and Motivations Summary
- POETIC: connecting paid, owned and earned media summary
- Advertising effectiveness: the long and short of it summary
- Screen Life: The View from the Sofa’
- TV Response: the new rules
- The link between creativity and effectiveness
- Full list of Thinkbox research
- Case Studies
- Nickable Stuff
- Events and Training
- Thinkbox Blog
- About Us
This study was conducted in 2014
Unless you’ve been living in a bubble for the past seven years, you can’t help but notice that we’re finally emerging from the depths of one of the worst recessions in modern history. This has had a significant effect on marketing, as ad expenditure is under constant pressure and greater scrutiny than ever. We all want to know if, and how, our advertising pays back in real terms.
It therefore makes sense for us to zone back into payback to ascertain whether advertising return has stayed the same or whether the ground has fundamentally altered. Given the seismic shifts that television has undergone in the last few years, both in terms of consumption and regulation, we now have an ever expanding canvas of formats to work with. Spot advertising remains the core focus of most TV activity, but it’s now often teamed with formats as varied as VOD, AFP and product placement. Thinkbox remains committed to providing as complete a picture as possible when it comes to deconstructing television payback.
We therefore commissioned Ebiquity to update, refresh and expand their previous payback work, (you can read all about this here. This draws on over 4,500 econometric models, 10 categories, 100 advertisers and over seven years’ worth of their clients’ data.
In particular, Ebiquity honed in on three very different product categories; these were retail, finance and FMCG.
1) TV advertising remains the most effective form of advertising and creates the most profit for businesses pound for pound
The study found that TV gave an average profit return of £1.79 for every £1 invested during 2011-14. This is in spite of the economic flux and significant changes in both technology and consumption.
This is also more than any other medium and shows a profit increase of over 5% since 2008-11.
There were significant differences between the three categories Ebiquity split out in terms of profit payback but TV’s payback has increased since 2011 and TV outperformed all other media for retail, financial services and FMCG.
2) TV is the lead effectiveness medium
TV advertising consistently outperforms other media when it comes to generating sales. TV is twice as effective at creating a sales uplift per equivalent exposure as the next best performing medium, which is press. In simple terms, if one exposure on TV delivers 100 product sales, then an equivalent exposure on press would deliver 52 product sales.
3) TV’s ‘halo effect’ boosts sales of other products within portfolio
TV advertising creates a ‘halo effect’ across a brand or range of goods. In fact, 37% of TV’s total sales effect is transferred to other brands within the portfolio; so if a finance brand advertises a current account on TV, the campaign is also likely to boost sales of its other products, such as mortgages or insurance.
4) There is plenty of scope to optimise TV investment across categories
Based on the effectiveness analysis, Ebiquity identified the optimum share of advertising budgets that should be spent on TV. For both finance and retail brands, 60% of the ad budget should ideally go on TV. For FMCG brands, it should be significantly more than this with Ebiquity identifying a major opportunity to increase investment in television.
5) Advertising on TV boosts other media TV advertising’s ‘multiplier effect’ consistently makes other elements of a campaign work harder. TV’s positive effects are felt across other awareness building channels: for radio advertising this effect can be greater than 100% and up to 50% for press and outdoor.
6) TV advertising increases branded search
The study found that the amount of branded searches created by TV advertising on search engines such as Google has increased by 33% per rating point during 2011-14 compared with 2008-11. It is likely this has been encouraged by the increase in ‘multi-screening’ – using an internet connected device while watching TV. Multi screening is great for TV as it enables viewers to respond in an instant. In addition, the proportion of brands featuring specific online calls to action in their TV ads has increased from 2% in 2005 to 16% in 2013.
7) TV sponsorship works as a medium in its own right
Using the most comprehensive record of TV sponsorship in the UK, Ebiquity identified that nearly a quarter (23%) of advertisers used sponsorship vehicles for the first time in the year preceding March 2014. Using the sales data from their own sponsorship-using clients (consisting of retail and FMCG), they discovered that TV sponsorship generated a higher level of profit ROI than other display media; excluding TV spot (there was not enough data to compare online display.)
The research reveals that TV continues to be the most profitable medium and that this profitability is increasing over time. It is the lead effectiveness channel across many different categories, driven by its ability to optimise the impact of other media, particularly online. Sponsorship and VOD are gaining prominence, though the latter in particular is still in its infancy and the lack of data reflects that. Where data is available for sponsorship, we can see it acts as a channel in its own right, in terms of size and investment and indeed payback.