33 matches were found
- Tuesday, October 22, 2002 #5574
Dear Guru, I am interested in the perfect values of the following media parameters for one TV campaign of beer product (May be there is some standards):
1. Number of flights per year
2. TRP’ s per week
3. TRP’ s per campaign
4. OTS per campaign
5. Reach 1+, 3+, 5+ per campaign
I am interested which are the effective frequency and the effective reach.
Thank you very much for your answers.
- The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, October 27, 2002 ):
There are no perfect answers. Within whatever budget you have, you must consider what is possible. If you can afford 5,200 GRP per year, is it better to have 100 GRP per week every week or 146 GRP for 9 four week flights?
Part of the answer depends on how you set the effective frequency goal. Perhaps seasonality tells you you need the 150 in the summer but only the 100 the rest of the year. What level do the competitors run? What is your brand awareness? What are your awareness goals, sales goals, share goals?
In short, budget, and many circumstances need to be considered rather than any quest for abstractly 'perfect' answers
- Friday, June 07, 2002 #5332
Is there absolutely no difference between TVR and TRP (and how about GRP...)? I have looked your though recent responses, but haven't found exactly what i need. thanks an advance!
- The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, June 08, 2002 ):
Click here to see past Guru responses about TVR and here for TRP & GRP
- TVR applies to single units and to TV
- The other two are accumulations
- TRP and GRP may be used in any medium
- TRP is not used in reference to households
- Thursday, April 11, 2002 #5217
what are GRP's
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, April 11, 2002 ):
Click here to see past Guru discussion of GRPs
- Tuesday, March 05, 2002 #5134
What is the difference between TRP's and GRP's? Thanks.
- The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, March 05, 2002 ):
The Guru has addressed this question often. Click here to see past Guru responses
- Friday, February 15, 2002 #5088
Dear Guru: i am media planner in Colombia and I´m trying to convince a client (femenine protection) to use RECENCY planning, but i have some doubts, i wonder if my brand have many products (8) that use the same brand name i can plan Recency for the whole brand? i mean, the TRP´s i use for each product can i cummulate them assumming is for the general brand? I have a very good budget, i have 19.000 TRP´s for the whole brand, and is enough to be the entire year.
2. Do you know some case study about a brand in femenine protection that has used recency?
- The Media Guru Answers(Friday, February 15, 2002 ):
With 19,000 GRP ( 365 per week), the Guru doesn't think recency will be a brand issue.
There is a judgment to make outside of media issues regarding whether the relationships between the various products form haloes around one another or if their messages are so different that they need separate communication goals.
If the products were entirely complementary, for instance, napkins, belts, panty liners, douche and deodorant, then they could be considered complementary. If they are more competitive, e.g. tampons vs pads, or have very different targets, e.g. teens versus women 50+, then the rub-off is less valid.
- Tuesday, February 05, 2002 #5059
Dear Guru (by the way, thanks for your earlier answers, they are really helpful !) :
If I reach 3 differents profiles of people with 1 outdoor campaign, is it correct to say that reachxfrequency for each target equals the TRP (target rate points), and that the GRP is reachxfrequency over the entire population. So the GRP would be composed out of several TRPs?
- The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, February 10, 2002 ):
First, GRP and TRP are equivalent terms. Some people reserve use of TRP (Target Rating Points) for cases where a speciific demographic is targeted, such as Women 18-49, College educated men, or Employed teenagers, and then only use "GRP" (Gross Ratings Points) for a Household target. Others use GRP for any target. In either case, the term means gross percentage of the specified target universe.
Arithmetically, Reach x Frequency = GRP or TRP. GRP or TRP for different targets may not be added.
- Wednesday, October 24, 2001 #4819
I know you have addressed this question many times, but I could not find an answer to help me in your archives. How can I determine reach & frequency for my television buy without buying software? I do not know reach or frequency, only total TRP's. Please help.
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, October 24, 2001 ):
Reach and frequency is a complex calculation. Without software, only tables of results based on averaging actula caluculation will be helpful. Complexities of dayparts, demographics, and timing can mean a 2:1 range in results for the same GRP. If the media vendors can't help you, eTelmar is a low-cost, pay-per-use alternative.
- Friday, October 12, 2001 #4785
What is the difference between 100 GRPs in Canada and 100 TRPs in US? I've heard that it is harder to reach Canadains than it is Americans through television, is that true? If so, why?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, October 15, 2001 ):
100 GRPs means a quantity of impressions equal to the size of the population. So in Canada, 100 GRPs represents about 11% as many impressions as in the US, since Canada has 11% as big a population.
'Harder to reach' might mean many different things. Perhaps the major programs in Canada have lower ratings than in the US, or there are more different program choices. Or cume patterns are lower for whatever reason. Or cost per point is greater due to less economy of scale.
- Wednesday, August 15, 2001 #4658
Could use some help framing questions for my agency relating to the effectiveness of a media campaign. We recently ran a test cell for a new campaign (our first)in which the agency provided information on total TRPs, total reach and total frequency over the life of the test. I need to determine how the frequency builds over time. Are there any formulas/rules of thumb for calculating build over time? If not, what specifically should I ask them for?
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, August 15, 2001 ):
Reach relates to GRP in a curvilinear function. Frequency relates to GRP in a straight line. This doesn't mean that each week adds the same amount of frequency, merely that it's fairly easy to work with.
The easiest thing however, is probably to ask the agency to calculate cumulative reach and frequency, week by week, over the course of the campaign.
- Friday, May 04, 2001 #4365
What is the minimum TRP level ONE creative execution should
have allocated for a campaign? For example, if I have
3,000 TRP's total (NATIONAL) for different products, shouldn't
there be a limit on the number of commercials we run,
in effect because none of the spots would have enough
weight attributed to it?
Thank you so much!!
- The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, May 05, 2001 ):
These decisions should be based on communications goal for each product, not numbers of commercials.
3000 GRP per year is about 60 per week. This is an adequate sustaining level for a brand, especially within recency concepts. If you are allocating this to products which have mutually exclusive selling periods of one month each, you could support 12 products comfortably.
Competitive climate should also be considered.
- Monday, April 30, 2001 #4348
Have a client that questioned the use of Recency planning for a packaged goods product launch in spot market television. I've read all questions/answers from 2000 in the archives and found it curious that no one questioned the fact that the levels used for standard recency planning of 60-80 TRPs per week refer to MEDIUM EXPOSURE not ADVERTISING EXPOSURE. Considering that probably only 40% of the commercial message will even register, aren't these levels low (clutter factor), even if they are spread across multiple weeks (in this case 9)?
- The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, May 01, 2001 ):
A: Medium exposure is the readily available planning metric.
B: Recency has been keyed to measured results from media exposure levels.
C: The media exposure levels referenced in Recency are -- and this is important -- REACH, not GRP. The reach threshhold is thought to be about 30 - 35, which might tie to various GRP levels, depending on media mix.
D: If best sales success is tied to sustained reach minima of 35, then that is the metric to connect with. The fact that the less readily available ad exposure or attentiveness-weighted GRPs are some other number is an artifact of the process, not a contradiction to the theory.
- Tuesday, March 20, 2001 #4273
Can you guess at an estimated reach for a 4-week radio schedule at 150 TRP/WK (W2554)? Also, do you happen to know the formula for manually figuring reach/frequency?
Thanks for your help!
- The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, March 20, 2001 ):
The formulas for radio reach are enormously complex and must take into account number of stations, daypart mix, average rating and other variables.
Your 600 GRP schedule might generate (roughly) from 35 to 70 reach, depending on these variables.
Click here to see past Guru
responses abourt calculating reach.
- Tuesday, February 06, 2001 #4162
Hallo, Dear Media Guru! Can You please help me to solve the
1 - I know that my TVcmp should get effective reach of 50%
with effective frequency 4+. How can I get(count) the number of GRP I need
to buy and TRP I need to reach?
2 - what concrete methods do can You recommend to define the levels of reach&frequency for concrete product's/brand's TV cmp. Thak you a lot.
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, February 07, 2001 ):
The Guru is not clear as to what distinction you are trying to make regarding GRP and TRP.
To determine the GRP/TRP needed to achieve a specific reach / effective frequency goal, you need a media software like that provided by Telmar or eTelmar.
Click here to see past Guru discussion about establishing levels.
- Wednesday, August 23, 2000 #3737
I am trying to figure out the wearout for print. My target is African Americans 12-24 and 18-49. All I have is the FY reach, freg and TRPs. What would be my next steps?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 28, 2000 ):
There are no accepted standard formulas for wear-out. By the nature of print, which tends to yield high reach adn low frequency, there is generally less concern about wear-out than in broadcast.
Some of the broadcast rules-of-thumb for wear out include "over 20 frequency in the second highest quintile" or "2000 GRP.
Niether of these are likely to occur in print. Custom research may be the only real way to evaluate this. Start with Starch.
- Thursday, July 06, 2000 #3604
I've mostly handled print and DM advertising and am trying to master radio. If a client is saying that their optimum TRP level is 175, what does that mean?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, July 10, 2000 ):
Click here for a definition of TRP
Presumably, the client would be speaking of the TRP level which has produced nest results for the budget.
- Monday, June 05, 2000 #3529
Hi, I would like you to expain the terms, TG, TRP, CRP, GRP, ROS, RODP and the basic difference between the trems. Thanks a ton!. Anjali
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, June 08, 2000 ):
- TG= Target group, the selected demographic or psychographic group against which a media plan or buy will be constricted
- TRP=Target Rating Points; the sum of the audiences of the all media insetions in a plan or schedule, expressed as a percentage of the target group population, such that 100 TRP indicates a summed audience equal to 100% of the group's population.
- GRP= Gross Rating Points; this si essentially identical to TRP, except that some planners use GRP only in reference to Household audiences and TRP for any other dempgraphic. Others use "GRP" in all cases
- CRP= Cost per Rating Point ( some say CPP for "Cost Per Point"); Simply a division of the media's cost by the rating points (TRPs or GRPs) delivered
- RODP=Run of Daypart, also referred to as "daypart rotator," wherein a broadcast spot is purchased to air at anytime within a defined dayaprt, such as 6am to 10am, Monday thru Friday
- ROS=Run of Schedule or Run of Station, wheriein a broadcast spot is purchased to air at anytime from station sign-on to sign-off. Sometimes the term "Daypart ROS" is encountered. This is another version of Run of Daypart.
- Wednesday, April 19, 2000 #3410
What is your opinion on using out-of-home (30-sheets or
bulletins) as a stand-alone medium for a brand-building
On a related note, are there any "rules" for adjusting
different types of media for their "impact" versus
other media (e.g., impact of an all-newspaper campaign
versus an all television campaign given the same TRP
levels and the same "likelihood of use" by the target
- The Media Guru Answers(Friday, April 21, 2000 ):
The Guru has seen impact adjusments across media based on recall, on attentiveness and on an advertiser's proprietary research, but no general rules-of-thumb.
Unfortunately, such adjustments are too often based on one unit of the advertising, such as a TV spot versus a radio spot, and don't take into account the crucial difference in number of spots or GRPs per dollar.
As for brand-building in outdoor, there are two principal considerations in the Guru's view:
- Definition of "brand building:" The term, one of those nebulous buzz-words which seems to mean whatever the speaker wishes, implies, to the Guru, the creation of a brand image and positioning from a low-awarness start.
- Limited message: How much can a brand be "built" by the few words and large graphic allowable in out-of-home media?
- Yet, the Guru is very favorably inclined to taking advantage of the enormous reach and frequency possible via out-of-home
In short, the Guru's gut feeling is that outdoor can contribute greatly to brand building, but that the process needs at least one longer-form medium.
- Thursday, October 28, 1999 #2918
could you please explain what should be the diffrent
between plan GRP and plan TRP and the real resoult in TRP and GRP terms?
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, October 28, 1999 ):
2. Some people use "TRP" when referring to GRPs of a specific
demographic and say "GRP" only in reference to Household Rating
- Monday, October 11, 1999 #2865
What is the difference between a TRP and a GRP?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, October 11, 1999 ):
2. Some people use TRP when referring to GRPs of a specific demographic and say GRP only in reference to Household Rating Points.
- Thursday, August 19, 1999 #2726
I buy a base level of 500 Ad 18-49 TRP's per week; a typical flight will run 4 weeks --- for a total of 2000 TRP's. From this base buy, we usually split the base buy in 1/2 trafficking in two different spots (1000 / 1000 TRP's). At what level do you think that wear out will occur? Thanks for your help.
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, August 19, 1999 ):
What is your definition of wearout? A frequency level? A decline in ad awareness? A sales decline? There are may ways to set wearout.
One of the oldest, and easier to use because it is defined entirely by media measurement, is a certain frequency level in the next-to-highest quintile, perhaps a frequency of 20.
Depending on daypart mix, this might mean wearout at about 2000 GRPs for a spot.
- Tuesday, June 08, 1999 #2562
I have an outdoor question. If showing size refers to the reach per day, i.e. 25# reaches 25% of a market per day, why aren't the estimated TRPs per month simply 25 x 28 = 700. Most studies I see quote a lower TRP level for a 25 showing. What gives?
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, June 09, 1999 ):
The Guru has come across this problem and found the answers.
There are two answers, one sensible, one nonsense, but both real.
Sensible: The "25 showing" is a standard number of panels, based on 25% of adult population. So if your target is Women 18-34, there may be a different number of women 18-34 GRPs in a showing actually bought as 25 Adult 18% GRPs. This is perfectly sensible, and happens ain all media, but the sellers and buyers of other media are fully conversant with these facts.
Now for the nonsense answer, which is most likely the basis of the number you were given. Various research companies, such as MRI have measured outdoor as part of multimedia reports and these generalized reports are being used to estimate target reach for a marketpace showing. Often a completely different source for average frequency is used and these two factors are multiplied to calculate GRPs. It seems invariably to be much lower than the GRPs you would get by the realistic method first described, and so makes outdoor seem less efficient than it should.
The misused sources could, instead be used to provide relative exposure indices between demographics, allowing a simple conversion of GRPs. The Guru hopes the Outdoor industry improves in this area.
- Monday, May 17, 1999 #2509
Media Guru -
I just read your responce to question #2507. Numerically, your answer may be correct that turning 200 pulsed TRP's into 100 continous TRP's may be more effective. (recency theory) It may not however be realistically the best course of action. Recency assumes that your advertising is ongoing reminder advertising and that your brand is well established. Also, purchase patterns and frequency are important. In terms of media, you have to consider what will 100 TRP's afford you? If you are in 2 or 3 dayparts in TV you will have a handful of spots, that the prospect will be lucky to see. I think that recency has to be balanced out with other marketing and media factors, including impact.
- The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, May 18, 1999 ):
As the Guru said in that response, the concept applied "particularly if your product is something people are buying continuously or regularly."
Recency does not make assumptions about product establishment -- though some practicioners may. In fact the original statement of the thesis emphasized the point, for effective frequency adherents, that after the third exposure, every exposure was at "three plus" and looking at abstractions like three plus in a set time frame was not necessary. About 60 GRP per week has been identified as a workable threshold of effectiveness.
Regarding dayparts, any mix of daypart is likely to deliver an average rating in the 5 to 8 range. Unless you have frequency goals by daypart (why?), 100 vs 200 seems a moot issue.
The net effect on consumers, at the end of four weeks, whether you have run 100 GRP per week or 200 GRP in weeks #1 and #3 only, will be about the same, in accumulated reach and average frequency.
The biggest difference will be in average reach per week (or per day). Your point makes a big issue of a time frame called a week, which is just an abstraction and a common convenience in looking at schedules.
Thinking of the schedule you would select to run 200 GRP in 7 days, why must it differ if spread over 14 days?
- Wednesday, May 12, 1999 #2507
For several years, I have bought my
client's spring and fall campaigns
on an alternating schedule i.e., one
week on and one week off @ 200 TRPs
per week. Historically, we take a four
month hiatus between campaigns.
Recently, someone told the client that
it would be more effective to buy
three weeks consecutively at lower
TRP levels. Either plan would be
restrained by a stated budget amount.
Do you have an opinion about each of
these strategies or your ownpreference in
television buying strategy when trying
to stretch the time on-air?
- The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, May 16, 1999 ):
You haven't stated how many weeks of 200 on and off you run.
But, assuming you take a one-week-on / one-week-off schedule of 200 and change it to 100/week continuous, this will probably be more effective, particularly if your product is something people are buying continuously or regularly. Since reach can only go just so high, the average reach per week of 100 GRPs continuous will be higher than the average weekly reach of one week at 200 and one week at 0 GRP. So the continuous schedule has a better chance or reaching someone just as they are about to make a purchase decision.
This is the essence of the "recency theory."
Click here to see past Guru responses about recency
- Thursday, April 01, 1999 #2426
What are the appropriate rating point levels for introducing a new grocery product into the New York Metro?
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, April 01, 1999 ):
The Guru has discussed this kind of question frequently.
Click here to see past Guru
responses about advertising levels
- Wednesday, March 24, 1999 #2407
How did the industry standard of requiring television stations to post at 90%
of the estimated TRPs on local spot buys originate?
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, March 24, 1999 ):
Just because your agency and many others use this figure, it doesn't mean it's an "industry standard." But it is probably most common. The practice began in recognition of the statisical instability of the audience research, due to sampling issues. Two people, negotitating in good faith, and agreeing that a schedule should deliver 100 GRP, can find that, without anyone doing anything wrong, the schedule is reported to underdeliver because of "bounce" in the ratings. So to avoid arguements over probably half of all the schedules bought and sold, it became common to agree that if the schedule posted at least 90% of what was bought, it was "no harm / no foul." In fact, in most cases, schedules estimated in good faith should, statistically do better than 90%. And if a buyer finds that every schedule bought from a specific station came in near 90%, then there's something wrong; schedules should post over as often as under if statistical bounce is the culprit. Of course a buyer doesn't want all schedules to post 110% or bigger either, that would imply bad estimationg and overspending.
The 90% figure shouyld be a negotiating point. Don't automatically expect a station to honor it unless it's your stated policy or by agreement. Many schedules are bought without guarantees.
The Guru recalls his own buying experience when one salesman would offer 90% guarantee and the next 95%. It made it too hard to compare proposals. So the said to all the sellers. Give me only numbers which are 100% guaranteed. Raise the cpm you are offering, if you must, to compensate, but all sales must be on the same basis.
- Tuesday, December 22, 1998 #2232
We use a buying service for our media. I'm just
learning and was asked what seems a simple question,
but do I have all the elements and could you
help me to formulate the equation to learn.
We are running 125 TRP's weekly in radio flighted
thoughout the year. 3,000 total TRP's for the year.
$550,000 total budget. CPP ranges from $32 to $200,
average is $90.
Q. With 125 TRP's a week, approximately how many spots
a week will this schedule produce?
- The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, December 23, 1998 ):
The Guru assumes you are running 125 GRP in each market.
Depending on market and demographic, average ratings run from about 1.0 - 2.0 on top stations. Divide GRP by the average rating you will buy to estimate number of spots. At an average rating of 1.0, 125 GRPs represents 125 spots.
And you didn't need any of that cost or cpp data.
- Wednesday, December 02, 1998 #2194
Dear Guru, can you name any media analysis tools and media predictive tools that media planners use on a regular basis without being too technical, of course. Many thanks
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, December 03, 1998 ):
Here are several:
- Reach: the number of different target households or persons exposed to a campaign (most often expressed as a percentage of the target universe, and most often calculated over a 4-week period).
- Frequency: The average number of exposures of the campaign to those reached.
- Gross Rating Points (GRP) / Target Rating Points(TRP): Essentially interchangeable terms for the sum of the audiences of all the ad units in the campaign, expressed as a percentage of the target universe.
- Gross Impressions: Same audience count as GRP/TRP but expressed in whole numbers rather than percents.
- CPP / Cost per GRP and CPM / Cost per thousand impressions: should be self evident from the previous. These are referred to as the "efficiency."
- Effective reach: Those in the "Reach" who experienced a specified minimum number of exposures (effective frequency)
All the above stem from the audience research tools and investment figures. So called "reach and frequency" systems typically generate all these figures.
Other tools, especially in print media are also occasionally used. These may include "time spent with" media vehicles, "page openings", attentiveness, etc.
- Thursday, September 03, 1998 #2026
Both we and our client agree to the recency theory. The
problem is that given the retraints of the budget,
we are only able to schedule "weekly" advertising for
about half the schedule while still achieving minimal
weekly TRP threshold levels. Right now we are wrestling
with the dilemma of how to schedule these weeks for the
first half of the year while still following the
principals of the recency theory: (1)12 weeks straight through
then a 14-week hiatus (2)6 weeks on, 14 weeks off, 6
weeks on or (3)an alternating schedule of 4 weeks on
and 4 weeks off, etc. throughout the period. Do you
have any theory on what might be the best approach to
- The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, September 03, 1998 ):
Thinking about a "threshold level" of GRP's is instinctive, but at odds with the essence of recency theory. Review other Guru answers below about recency. Please also see a very interesting discussion of recency on our MediaPlanning e-mail list. The list archives are at Ad Talk and Chats . Why not subscribe to the list and bring your question there as well?
- Tuesday, August 25, 1998 #2014
Hi, I would like to know anything regarding setting the minimun level of TRP's, or minimun reach goal. We know how to set the optimun level, but there is a minimun? One point where is better not to advertise at all. Thank you.
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 31, 1998 ):
Any GRPs generate some reach and frequency.
Any reach generates some consumer impact. Setting minima is a matter of judgment and logic.
If you are an adherent of the effective reach theory, you will determine what is your effective level (3+ or more) and what portion of your target you need to reach at that level, to make advertising worthwhile. This determination will tell you either how much time you can be active in advertising or across how much geography. The Guru favors 50% as the portion of target to set as minimum to reach effectively.
If you believe totally in the recency theory, any is a reasonable minimum, because each impression has its greatest chance to produce a sale this way, as it is more likely to produce unduplicated reach at any point in time. Yet, few planners can avoid feeling there should be a minimum, probably because they want to see measured sales movement for some period of time.
In either case, seasonality and purchase cycles will inform the decision.
- Monday, August 24, 1998 #2011
We are in the process of planning for a major TV client
where we have been applying the recency theory for
the past year. Because of the size of the budget we
have been limited to around 70TRPs weekly essentially
for the entire year. In Year II our client has asked
us to consider temporarily abondoning the recency
theory and to move dollars (and TRPs) out of the more
expensive buying months (April, May) to the relatively more
more inexpensive months (January, Feb)and to increase
our TRP levels accordingly. Do you have any input on
which strategy should/could have more effect on brand
performance assuming all other factors are equal
(pricing, distribution etc.)?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 24, 1998 ):
First we have to assume that the basis of recency theory is accepted.
Recency theory calls for reaching as many people as possible as close to the sale as possible. Thats's why continuity is emphasized for products with little seasonality and regular purchase cycles.
One of the essential elements of recency theory is that not all impressions or GRPs are equal, even in the same programming. You are focusing on cost per point. As you are probably aware, reach developed per GRP decreases with every added GRP in a schedule. There is therefore, a declining return on investment in reach at any point in time, which is why spreading out prospects reached produces the optimal return. The first 10 GRPs bought in a week generate more reach than the last 10 GRPs.
Hence, the added impressions bought when they are cheap produce less sales than the impressions lost from the more expensive times.
So now you have to evaluate what might be produced. Assuming you are lowering -- not eliminating --activity in higher priced periods how many more impressions, and how much more reach can you achieve in low priced times. If you cut back 10 reach points per week in July but buy 20 added reach points per week in March, perhaps the added reach can sell more than the lost reach, or perhaps not. The Guru would look for a 50% minimum trade up in added vs lost reach points to justify the change; i.e. if the plan goes down 10 reach points per week in one period, then it need to go up 15 reach points per week in the other.
- Saturday, July 11, 1998 #1945
Dear Guru, I have seen you use "advertising weight" in other response. Please clarify the meaning of this percentage. Thank you.
- The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, July 11, 1998 ):
Advertising weight refers to the gross audience of a campaign. It may be GRP/TRPs or impressions. It may be considered in total or by individual demographic segment. While some look primarily at expenditure, "weight" is a better guide to communications impact.
In competitive analysis, each advertiser's weight is compared to all others as a percent of the total weight in the category to calculate "Share of Voice."
- Monday, July 21, 1997 #1376
I've been out of school, working for a large agency
for about a year. I would like for you to help me with
just one question: What is the difference between a
GRP and a TRP? I don't think there is a difference, but
co-workers use TRP and I've learned it as a GRP (Gross
Rating Point). Please help with any word origin or history
you may have.
Thanks for your help,
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, July 21, 1997 ):
Until the late 70's, most TV advertising, especially for
major package goods brands, was bought on a Household GRP
basis. As demographic targeting became more common, "Target
Rating Points" (TRP) became a term distinguished from
Household Gross Rating Points, which was especially useful
when a plan discussed both. Some people still use phrases
like Women 18-49 GRP when others would say TRP. Except
that HH points are never TRP, there is really no
What is important is consistency within any document and advertiser.
- Saturday, February 22, 1997 #1039
I am trying figure out the best way to calculate reach & frequency for the following:
4 consecutive weeks (250 TRP's per week)
Then scaling back and running 175 TRP's per week - Every other week for the following 8 weeks.
How do you calculate R&F when your schedule runs on an every other week basis?
- The Media Guru Answers(Monday, February 24, 1997 ):
There is no basis for believing that an alternate week schedule of 700 total points (175 per week for 4 of 8 weeks) cumes to a different total than 87.5 GRP per week for 8 weeks, as long as the scedules are otherwise identical in numbers of different announcements, and numbers of different episodes of the same programs.
It is true that if the schedules per week of activity were solarge as to exhaust reach potentials, the answer might bedifferent, but this is far below such levels
So the total schedule of the first four weeks at 250, plus the 4alternating weeks can be calculated as if there were lower levelconsecutive weeks.