hamish pringle - future of tv presentation

The Future of TV Conference, Edinburgh 11th May 2011

What should agencies do about TV?


Contents

1.

2.

3.

Listen to the facts about TV, not the rhetoricKnow the case law on TV’s effectivenessAdopt ‘both and’ mindset to benefit clients


1. Listen to the facts about TV, not the rhetoric


— In early ‘noughties’ the pundits were predicting the death of TV and the 30 second spot

—We believed they were wrong…

—…so we looked at under-lying trends to provide a fact-based forecast

IPA commissioned The Future Foundation to forecast the media landscape


10 year forecast for the future

• Three future scenarios (of many)

• New segmentation of media


Three future scenarios

Media dominates(legislative creep)

Media led

Consumerled

Consumers in charge(permission)

Central

Current directionof travel


— ‘Display’ versus ‘Classified’— ‘One way’ versus ‘Two way’— ‘Not named’ versus ‘Named’— ‘Non screen’ versus ‘Screen’

A new segmentation of the media market

Different market shares, depending on scenario


‘Display’ v ‘Classified’ (inc. ‘Search’)

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

Central

Consumer

Media


‘Two way’ v ‘One way’

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

Central

Consumer

Media


10

‘Named’ v ‘Not named’

6%

11%

16%

21%

26%

31%

36%

41%

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

Central

Consumer

Media


‘Screen’ v ‘Non screen’

15%

17%

19%

21%

23%

25%

27%

29%

31%

33%

35%

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

20

14

20

16

Central

Consumer

Media


— Increased share for ‘Classified’

— Increased share for ‘Two way’

— Increased share for ‘Named’— Increased share for ‘Screen’

Forecast to 2016

We forecasted screen-based communications, aka ‘TV’, were set for considerable growth


We were right…


Commercial TV impacts up over 44% since 2000

0

200,000,000

400,000,000

600,000,000

800,000,000

2000 2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Individuals

30

” e

qu

iva

len

t im

pa

cts

(m

)

Source: BARB/Infosys/TechEdge Jan-Dec 2000-2010. *BARB panel changed

Source: BARB/Infosys/TechEdge Jan-Dec 2000-2010. *BARB panel changed


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Indivs ABC1 Ads Men 16-34s HW CH

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

+22.4%

+22.1% +23.6%

+10.8%+7.8%

Bil

lio

ns

Audiences

Source: BARB

…and for all demographics

Source: BARB


TV still takes the lions’ share of media use

26%

19%

4% 1%

50%

TV

Radio

Internet

Newspapers

Magazines

Source: Touchpoints 3 – Adults

Base: All Media use per day

Source: Ofcom Digital TV Update Q4 2010 (Published Apr 2011)


86% of TV viewed live even in DTR homes who view more, so impacts increased (contrary to ‘ad-skipper’ pundits…)

8692.4

147.6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Individuals with DTRs All UK Individuals

All

Vie

win

g %

% live viewing % time-shifted viewing

Source: BARB 2010 – All digital homes

Source: BARB 2010 – All digital homes


2. Know the case law on TV’s effectiveness


30 years of cases to analyse and learn from


The number of potential media options and media used has increased dramatically


TV used in 92% of winning cases, and with fewest other media


Three key reports setting out the ‘case law’


• Emotional is better than rational in commercial communication

• ‘Fame’ is the most powerful driver of effectiveness

• TV most effective medium, leverages others

• Multi-media (3 or 4) are more effective than 1


• 0.5% £ market share increase achieved by 10% extra SOV for Nielsen fmcg on av.

• +0.8% £ share increase achieved by 10% extra SOV by IPA Effectiveness Awards fmcg on av.

• So +60% effectiveness via excellent strategy, channel planning and creative

• First time we’ve been able to put a value on quality…


• Cross-analysis of the Gunn Report and IPA Effectiveness Awards

• Factor of 11 increase in effectiveness by award-winning creativity

• The more awards won, the greater the effectiveness: creativity sells

• (Maybe juries know something about ‘fame’?)

• Too many creatively awarded campaigns are starved of SOV


The state of the art

Emotion, ‘fame’, TV+multi-media, extra SOV, award-winning effectiveness and creativity = increased £ SOM


3. Adopt ‘both and’ mindset to benefit clients


—Each new media sector is championed by people (and their trade bodies) who believe ‘old media’ are superceded by their exciting new one

— Journalists love this ‘either or’ story and regurgitate it, pretty much uncritically

— This has affected, often adversely, the advice agencies give to their clients

Beware self-interested cheer-leading


—Media are often additive, not substitutional – hence importance of IPA TouchPoints

— The audio-visual medium, aka ‘TV’ continues to be the most powerful

—Has a great effect when leveraging a well-judged media mix

— ‘TV’ / video in ‘bought’, ‘owned’ and ‘earned’ media is a great driver of the brand story

— It’s the ‘water’ in the water cooler, both offline and online

Embrace the ‘both and’ mindset


— TV best at creating ‘fame’ and delivering emotional communication

— TV +3 or 4 bought media (but no limit to ‘owned’ and earned’) proven most effective

— Increased number of screen-based media platforms and bandwidth means more ‘TV’

— SOV v SOM and creativity are crucial

Summary


— Listen to the facts about TV, not the rhetoric

—Know the case law on TV’s effectiveness

—Adopt ‘both and’ mindset to benefit clients

What should agencies do about TV?


Q&Awww.ipa.co.uk

hamish pringle - future of tv presentation

Education

bought media

media usesource

media marketdisplay

old media

death of tv

based media platforms

commercial tv impacts

leverages othersmultimedia