Bang-for-bucks will be the only topic on the table in the next few years. And marketing metrics is sorely in need of a rethink if it's going to thrive. Simon at Big Picture picks up this quote from mega-mogul Barry Diller: "You really want to get a headache? Try to understand Internet
advertising. Social networking advertising is being discounted because
there is so much inventory [of available ad spots], and because methods
have not yet been found to make it very effective. Will that get
figured out? I absolutely believe it will. What form will it take?
Absolutely unknown." Kent Nicholls says the answer is for digital executives to build powerful stories that are as effective as those in print media: "Advertisers don’t know how to value online eyeballs. The myths of
old media have accrued until now they are just pure common sense or
conventional wisdom. My favorite example is what’s known as the pass along rate
in magazines. The pass along rate is some imaginary number that
publishers say that original subscribers pass along the magazine to
friends and other non-subscribers. And that certainly happens in the
real world, but it’s also very hard to quantify. It’s squishy and
human and imprecise." Joining the debate from Saatchi Towers, Richard Huntingdon decries the: "the ludicrous way in which the digital community generally sets about proving effectiveness." Richard says that at Saatchi, it's all about hard returns: "Talking about any effectiveness metric that does not tell you the incremental profit
that your marketing activity generated for the business isn’t worth the
paper it is written on." So there you go. Digital metrics are a mess while traditional techniques continue along a path of relentless value that sates the desires of every C-Suite bean-counter in triplicate. But hold on. If that's the case, why are the commercial TV channels in the UK suffering so badly? Surely those gilt-edged media metrics should have brands forcing their shekels into the hands of TV execs promising juicy TVRs and solid returns. And if newspapers can be shown to keep on delivering print sales straight to the bottom line, why are they are finding the going so tough? The truth is that traditional advertising metrics are every bit as messy as those found in digital. Marketing folk may feel all-at-sea on the vast oceans of digital data that the web serves up, but traditional craft are creaking and look ready to go under. And therein lies the opportunity. In 2009, talking about digital vs traditional media will be increasingly meaningless. As all media is sucked onto personalised IP platforms and the share-and-compare economy grows, the idea of analogue vs digital will become a distant memory. Brands will want it all. As Hulu has done in the US, the big winners will be those who can mix the proven strengths of the old with the innovation of the new. The ability to deliver that double-whammy will be the only thing worth measuring.
Great post James.
Posted by: neilperkin | December 19, 2008 at 06:12 PM
Hey thanks Neil. And Happy Christmas...
Posted by: James Cherkoff | December 19, 2008 at 07:40 PM