Home Page The Advertising Media Internet Center

Telmar Home Page


Media Guru

Guru Search Results: 7 matches were found

Wednesday, September 20, 2000 #3816
Do you know of any "industry standards" that exist on the topic of doing post-buy analysises on radio?

The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, September 23, 2000 ):
The long-time "industry standard" has been either don't do it, or post from the same book as purchased. Either position is based on the assumption that there is a lot of statistical bounce in radio ratings, which are not reflective of actual listening. In fact, across a multi-station, multi-spot schedule most statisical bounce is compensated. The question remains of whether a single station can be accountable for ratings variance when they deliver the schedule as ordered.

Monday, August 21, 2000 #3726
Guru...I am a media buyer in a very dynamic local radio to book stations are having 100% plus AQH ratings increases and decreases. Since there is no consistency in ratings (several new stations have recently entered the market) how do you suggest handling annual negotiations? In the past, annual rates have been set, but this no longer seems applicable with the dramatic shifts in ratings. Is establishing a CPP goal and adjustings rates according to ratings appropriate? Thanks for any help you can offer in handling annual local radio negotiations.

The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 21, 2000 ):
Establishing a CPP and adjusting when ratings are posted is a good solution, and is analogous to network TV dealings. But, the station will probably only want to make-good by giving free air time, and an advertiser is not likely to agree to pay more money if ratings go up.

Consider the syndicated TV approach, where there are "recaps" or recapturable spots. They are scheduled for the advertiser as potential makegoods, but if ratings performance stands up to the deal, they are recaptured by the station for sellable inventory.

Wednesday, January 12, 2000 #3114
Why don't Agencies hold radio to the same standards of TV in terms of posting. I understand there are flaws in measurement (as with TV) however, shouldn't radio stations be held accountable for under-delivering the points they project? Clear Channel has even made it a corporate policy to NOT post and, since they own such a large percentage of radio stations in many markets, it's virually impossible to "buy around" them. Any suggestions on how to make these radio stations more accountable?

The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, January 12, 2000 ):
Spot radio ratings typically appear quarterly, meaning that there isn't an opportunity, during a buy, to monitor how the buy performs and to add weight if necessary.

Spot TV, even where weekly reporting is available is not usually sold with an audience guarantee.

Network radio, like network TV is sold on a guarantee basis.

The old theory, that radio ratings were too subject to statictical bounce, due to limited sample size behind any given rating and that therefor neither buyer nor seller could be sure of performance, still holds.

radio buys can be guaranteed if

  • There is agreement that the buy must deliver the GRPS, based on actual air times and ratings in a report which is available at the time the buy is made
  • If the agency insists adamantly that a guarantee is a condition of the buy.

Monday, October 04, 1999 #2843
Guru - I have been put in the situation of planning, negotiating and buying online advertising. I'm having difficulty in determining the appropriate number of impressions to purchase for a two week flight of an entertainment property. I understand every site is different, but is there a benchmark to follow? Someone once said that the minimum level of impressions to be effective is 10% of the site's available impressions. This seems high. Also, is there a syndicated source that lists the total number of impressions available per month? Can online impressions be purchased against a specific demo (i.e. Men 25-54)? Thank you for your help.

The Media Guru Answers(Monday, October 04, 1999 ):
There are many buying-minimum rules of thumb that seem arbitrary on first consideration, like '12x per week per station' in radio, but have a logic if someone clearly explains it.

However, this "10% of the available impression" idea is certainly not one of these. It's not only arbitrary, but relatively ridiculous.

Consider a site like Yahoo, which may generate well over 1 billion monthly impressions. 10% of that is 100 million. If you bought that weight at a $30 CPM, that would be $3,000,000 per month. Are there many advertisers spending at that rate? And, if you think about other top sites, it becomes even more fantastic.

According to Nielsen//Netratings, top, deep-pockets, online advertisers like Microsoft, AOL and Yahoo each ran about 200 to 600 million impressions in August. And of course, they didn't do that on just a few sites.

What would a 10% rule achieve? Identification with a specific site? Perhaps some very targeted sites which fit your campaign creative very well are worth sponsoring at this level. Or do you think each person exposed is aware of how many other people are seeing other banners on the same site?

By the way, the Guru would be interested to hear anyone's justification of a '10% of available impressions' rule and will post here any that make sense.

It's also worth noting another point here: Bigness is of questionable value in selecting on-line media vehicles. Exposure isn't figured in the same way as for other media: In a magazine, each ad page is treated as if it had the average audience of the issue; within some tolerance, this is realistic. But in a popular web site with potentially hundreds of pages, neither the home page nor those within the site get all the monthly impressions the site accrues. Any one page might get less than one percent of the total, and a rotating banner might get less than one percent of the page where it's shown. One million impressions can be bought from a site with one billion to sell or with just two million. If the targeting is controlled, there is equal value.

Sometimes page or section content will allow targeting to be assumed. On some sites, registration data, or 'cookies', or IP tracking can allow ads to be served to specified categories of visitors.

Monday, November 23, 1998 #2170
Dear Guru! Since there are several media planning softwares in the market I wanted to ask: are there any guidelines for measuring the gap between the prediction and the actual results. What I mean is: Is there a "normal" gap, for example: 20% gap between the predicted reach\Grps (pre campaign)to the results (post campaign). Thank you!Irene Kol.

The Media Guru Answers(Monday, November 23, 1998 ):
This is a two part question:

1- The "gap" in GRPs will not be due to the software, it is based on your buyers' estimating ability and the accuracy of post analysis as well as the reliability of your audience research.

2- Since reach is derived from models based on averages, there can be variance. Variance will also depend on the medium you are considering and how it is measured.

For example, if your magazine audience research is conducted once a year when you plan a quarter's campaaign of 1 insertion in each of 5 magazines and then buy exactly that, how will you ever know if the reach was different than you planned?

On the other hand, suppose you plan radio based on a specific number of GRP on a specific number of stations, in a specific daypart mix, and you buy exactly that. How would you judge that the reach goal wasn't met, unless the buy did not deliver as planned, whether because of poor estimating, station failing to schedule properly or a new ratings book?

In no case are you dealing with the accuracy of the planning software.

Many agencies and clients agree to a +/- 10% range in delivery of broadcast GRPs. Other standards are often agreed as well.

Tuesday, July 28, 1998 #1975
Is there an accurate and reliable way to post spot radio? We have looked at two book averages(latest book and sweep book) as well as using only the latest book. In addition, is it possible to post based on specific times or are we limited to hourly data? Any suggestions?

The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, July 29, 1998 ):
1) The most accurate way to post is always using the measurement closest to the actual airing of the schedule. Of course one may have to take special programming into account, For instance if you buy the World Series, relying on data in the O-N-D book would be silly.

In ordinary cases, averaging books, when the schedule falls entirely into just one, is pointless.

2) Nothing finer than hourly is reported.

Wednesday, March 08, 1995 #1864
I am looking for background for a POV on Network radio posting. Can you recommend anyware on the Net that might be helpful?

The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, March 08, 1995 ):
The key points in Network radio posting are: 1) decide what book is post basis; latest at buy or closest to schedule dates

2) what book is buy/post basis; RADAR or Arbitron Nationwide.

However, since neither really allows exact quarter hour post whole issue may be moot.

As for places on the Web, the only place you might try are the sites of some of the radio stations that have gone up recently. A list is available in our Web Sites section.