AMIC's Media Guru


Media Guru

Guru Search Results: 90 matches were found

Monday, October 26, 2015 #9119

are :15 seconds bookends giving the same value as a stand alone :30? are the rating for :15 bookends doubled


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, October 26, 2015 ):

The rating points for two :15s are twice as great as for a :30, unless you are equivalizing. There is potentially a bit more reach and there is more frequency.

Friday, October 10, 2014 #9010

If I have an Overall GRP goal of 23GRPS for a 6 week flight (~3.84 total grps/week). And the Unit length mix is 50% :30s / 50% Equivilized :15s. what would the weekly GRP break out be?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, October 11, 2014 ):

An equivalized :15 is worth half of its ordinary GRP value. So let's imagine you are buying spots with an average rating of 0.384. You would need 10 :30's OR 5 :30's plus 10 equivalized :15's.

Or at equal units, the weekly GRP breakout is 6.67 :30s = 2.56 GRp and 6.67 equivalized :15 = 1.28 GRP

2.56 GRP + 1.28 GRP = 3.84 GRP. Adjust accordingly for other ratings.

Thursday, May 22, 2014 #8974

Is the GRP of 15" the same as the GRP of 30 or 60"? If not how to calculate it?


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, May 22, 2014 ):

In reality, they are the same, but some buyers adjust in proportion to length as a financial tool. In that case a :15 is equated to half a :30'S GRP and a :60 is double.

Tuesday, November 05, 2013 #8905

Dear Guru, is there a specific reason why tvc spots have traditionally been 30 seconds. Why don't advertisers like to create 20 second masters instead of 20 second edits?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, November 06, 2013 ):

It's tradition, as you say. Around this tradition, TV vendors have built schedules and time slots. In the '80's, when advertisers started looking at :15's they saw the trade-off in awareness and retention.

Saturday, September 07, 2013 #8883

What's the right split between :15 and :30 second TV spots


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, September 07, 2013 ):

It depends:

  • How complex is your message?
  • How well established is your message?
  • How well established is your ad awareness/brand awareness?
  • What is your reach or frequency goal versus your budget?
  • Etc.

Wednesday, August 07, 2013 #8878

Hi I would like to undertand why do we need to equilize in 30'' to get the total GRP in order to have SOV when comparing competitors. Why we do not simply make the addition of GRP no matter the format ? Sorry for my english.. I am french! Thanks Guru !


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, August 08, 2013 ):

SOV comparisons are meant to compare the strength of communications of competitors, not simply reach and frequency. Different values must be given to :15 messages versus :30 messages.

Thursday, March 07, 2013 #8826

Is there a formula to get from unequivalized to equivalized when there is a mix involved? For example. If I have 100 equivalized GRPs and I want to unequivalize them with a 30% :30 & 70% :15 mix, I get 170 unequivalized GRPs. But, when I try to get back from 170 unequivalized GRPs to the 100 equivalized, the same math gets me to 110 GRPs. Am I making sense? HELP!


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, March 07, 2013 ):

Always keep in mind that the :30's don't change going in either direction.

If your unequivalized GRP are 30% :30's or 30 GRP, that leaves 70 equivalized GRP to deal with. If they are :15's equivalized then they must have been 140 unequivlized. 140 + 30 is 170.

If you equivalize the 140 of :15's they go back to 70. The :30's are still 30. 70 + 30 + 100

Thursday, February 21, 2013 #8822

Is there a formula for converting unequivalized TV GRPs to equivalized GRPs?


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, February 21, 2013 ):

If the unequivalized GRPs are from :30s, then they convert to equivalized at 100%

If the unequivalized GRPs are from :15s, then they convert at 50%

If the unequivalized GRPs are from :60s, then they convert at 200%

And so on.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012 #8788

Hello Media Guru, I am having a hard time understanding ratings when in regards to bookends. I understand that when converting a :30 to a bookend you are getting two :15s within the same break for the price of a :30. What I don't understand is how the ratings are applied to the bookend. If the :30 rating is a 1.0, do we assign a 1.0 to the bookend or does it become a 2.0? I'm getting different answers.


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, November 14, 2012 ):

It depends upon what you are trying to accomplish.

If you have two :15s, and are just counting GRPs, you can add the 1.0 rating twice.

If you are thinking about reach, there is negligible effect of the second :15 vs one :30.

If you are equivalizing, then the two :15s have the same 1.0 total rating as the one :30 in the same break.

Thursday, October 11, 2012 #8768

Hi Guru, please if I bought 100 GRPs against each of the following timelength: 15sec, 45Sec, 60Sec and 90sec, how do I calculate the conversion factors which I would then apply to each timelenght GRPs to get the 30sec equivalent GRPs delivered respectively by 15sec, 45Sec, 60Sec & 90sec? Kind regards. Jonadab Egbowon


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, October 11, 2012 ):

It is all in proportion to the length vs :30.

  • :15 converts to 50% of :30
  • :45 is 150% of a :30, etc

Wednesday, August 29, 2012 #8753

Guru, thanks for this blog. In comparing the effectiveness of 15 second v. 30 second ad spots, wouldn't the short 15 second spot mean that price appeals as opposed to brand building appeals would be more useful?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, August 29, 2012 ):

That's one possible distinction. More commonly, in the Guru's experience, :15s are used to reinforce branding messages already established via :30s

Monday, August 27, 2012 #8751

Hi Guru, How do you call that rate card sheet of any given TV station, that contains the prices of any given duration from 5 seconds till 60 seconds? Would it be "seconds breakdown rate card" or "rates by the second"? Please advice Thanks


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 27, 2012 ):

That's simple the "Rate Card." Including various unit lengths is normal. There will be limits to the options. There might be :10, :15, :30, :45, :60, :90, :120, but no other options, or even fewer.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012 #8749

Hello Media Guru, What is the difference between unequivalized and equivalized units when dealing with broadcast?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, August 22, 2012 ):

Equivalizing is simply a way to compare the value of units of different lengths.

A :30 is treated as the standard. A :15 or a :60 airing in the same minute actually has the same rating and impressions. But a :15 would be sold for half the price, while a :60 in the same minute would be sold at double the :30 price. To equivalize, the :15 is treated as if it had only half the audience and a :60 as if it had double the :30 audience.

Friday, March 16, 2012 #8571

Hi Guru, u had mentioned that SOV to SOE ratio can be greater or lesser than 1... but then what is the ideal situation to be in.. bcos if the SOV comes to 15% and SOE comes to 30%, that means you have spent more but your share impressions are less in the market... is this a good case to be in .... or if i do the reverse of it say SOV is 30% and SOE is 15% t(ratio being 2) then it means you got more impressions for your bucks... i am right or there is a trick involved Thanks Guru.


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, March 17, 2012 ):

There is no simple "best" situation

.Consider this scenario:

You use all :15 copy and the competition uses all :30s, while you both invest the same dollars. Your share of impressions will be 67% while your share of expenditure is 50%. The competitor's share of expenditure is 50% and share of impressions is 33%. Who is in the better position?

It depends on how you value :15's. This in turn may depend on how new or well established your brand is, or how new the copy strategy, or how simple or complex the positioning, etc.

Friday, February 17, 2012 #8480

When using :15 second bookends, should I count the frequency twice? I am struggling to understand equivalized vs unequivalized TRPs.


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, February 17, 2012 ):

Equivalizing is about costing, primarily. If you mean literal bookends, as in first and last position in a pod, then counting frequency twice is reasonable. In effect this means count the TRP twice and reach once.

Since this bookend scenario puts each :15 in a different commercial minute, it is theoretically possible to see a reach lift from one :15 to the other.

Friday, January 06, 2012 #8390

Hi Media Guru. I am working on a Network Television plan where I need to provide an optimum mix of :30s and :15s spots. My question is, when the mix changes from :30s to :15s, do the GRPs in the plan double? For example, if I use to have 25 weekly :30s GRPs and I convert them to :15s spots do they increase to 50 weekly GRPs?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, January 07, 2012 ):

Assuming the budget is constant, switching to :15's will double the GRP in the plan.

Tuesday, January 03, 2012 #8384

Dear Guru, in response to your answer from Tuesday, December 20, 2011 (#8369): As weighting for unit length is only a technique for comparing values - should weighted numbers only be used when comparing different campaigns? Ie. when analysing a single campaign - unweighted numbers should ALWAYS be used even when different spot lengths are involved? Is this correct? Thank You!


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, January 04, 2012 ):

Let's break it down:

    One exposure of a commercial to a member of its target group is an impression

  • Whether the impression is based on a :15, :30, or :60 copy leads to differences in impact on the consumer, but it is still just one exposure
  • Reach is a metric for for counting numbers of exposures of different members of the target group
If two plans have the same reach but one has :30s and the other :15s, there is a clear added value in the :30s plan, but the difference is not the reach.

When one plan has greater reach and another has less but has longer copy lengths, then you must decide how much extra value there is in copy length. But it is not best judged as a reach adjustment.

Tuesday, December 06, 2011 #8332

When buying national tv, the cost of a :15 is half that of a :30, but does the same principle apply to spot TV? In other words, would a :15 unit be half that of a:30? I think there used to be a premium attached to buying :15's locally but want to know if this is still the case? Thanks


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, December 07, 2011 ):

Local solo :15s are rare, are often pre-emptible and can cost 65% of :30s.

Thursday, November 03, 2011 #8275

say we have a 50 GRPs for a :30 ad (national)... remind me what happens to the GRPs if we run a :15 v :60


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, November 03, 2011 ):

Assuming you invest the same dollars, you would probably get roughly twice as many GRP in :15 or hlaf as many in :60.

Buyers sometimes "equivalize," which artificially treats a :60 as being worth double the GRP of a :30 and a :15 as half, just to account for pricing.

In reality, a given spot in the same minute has the same rating, regardless of length.

Monday, September 26, 2011 #8223

How do you assign a rating to a 5-second TV spot?


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, September 26, 2011 ):

Rating is entirely independent of unit length. In the same program minute, a :05 or a :15 or a :30 or a :60 have the same rating.

If, for some reason you have to assign a value or cpm, the simple proportion to a :30 may be used, but rating does not change.

Sunday, July 24, 2011 #8148

Hi Guru, as a brand manager in a leading packaged goods company, am a bit let down that so many media decisions are based on thumbrules than on validated quanitiative data. Are there any quantitative tools as definitive as LINK is for ad quality testing, that can help answer critical media planning questions below to maximise media dollars? 1/ Effective Frequency: Ostrow tool is not validated, application is highly judgemental, doesnt account for fact that exposure


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, July 24, 2011 ):

First off, let's consider your own creative-oriented bias here, no offense meant.

Within ad quality measurement there are some measures that are quantitative and within media planning there are some measures that are solidly quantitative. The problem is how the quantitative measures can "accurately" guide marketing action.

Just because you can use proven methods to reliably measure ad quality in terms of recall or intent to purchase and use that to select the better piece of copy, does not mean there is a better way to plan a copy pool, or forecast advertising results except with your own application of judgement to use of these tools.

Similiarly, media planners have identified solidly measurable, quantitative metrics like GRP, frequency and reach that, at least directionally, have known impact on plan success. Highly experienced media professionals like Joe Ostrow have built logical ( and, importantly, repeatable ) approaches to integrating these metrics with other marketing factors, such as competitve pressure, brand awareness, market share, category interest, etc.

Each Brands' unique combinations of market factors, ad quality, and goals, make it virtually impossible for a single organization to collect enough sets of media plans / marketing backgrounds / sales results to build a simple, proven model to guide all media decisions reliably. For a given set of results in the quantitative tools and a specific set of advertsing goals, the tools should reliably distinguish better choices. Advertinsg goals handed over to the media planners should guide many of these decisions. Budget vs reach goals versus marketing timing issues; branding vs retail promotion, etc. are key controlling factors in setting :30/:15 mix as well as timing of introduction of different copy. Experience, guided by logic and available quantitative tools are the best we are likely to do, in the Guru's opinion.

Thursday, June 23, 2011 #8117

What are bookends?


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, June 23, 2011 ):

A typical commercial pod runs 2+ minutes. :15 spots from the same brand / product at each end of the pod are "bookends."

Sunday, May 15, 2011 #7879

How can you measure TV Ad clutter? and what relevance does it have on your OTS levels


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, May 15, 2011 ):

Clutter can be measured in number of non-program minutes per hour and / or number of non-program units per hour, i.e. 15 minutes of :15 commercials might well be considered more "cluttered" than 15 minutes of :60s.

This has no relevance to OTS of a schedule.

Tuesday, April 05, 2011 #7841

Dear Guru, my question is about 30sec GRPs, how can we convert GRPs into 30 sec GRPs. Let suppose i have aired 20 spots of 20 sec each and got 25 GRPs how can i convert these GRPs into 30 secs. is there any formula regarding this? is it fine if i divide each spot;s GRPs by its duration and than multiply the result by 30 to find 30 sec GRPs (spot duration is 20 sec, its GRPs are 2, 2/20x30)?


The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, April 05, 2011 ):

You need to establish a standard; what is the reason for your analysis?.

Most simple is the linear conversion you propose, where a :20 is worth two-thirds of a :30, but in what context? If you are concerned with pricing or "equivalization" issues, this is appropriate.

However, in absolute measurement, or for reach estimation purposes, a GRP is a GRP. It is simply reflective of a number of pairs of eyeballs exposed (impressions) divided by a population universe.

By the way, in the early days of :15s, recall measurement showed :15s were "worth" 77% of :30's and some people used that factor in some analyses.

Sunday, March 27, 2011 #7840

In regards to this question yesterday...would grps stay the same or would I halve the :15? Saturday, March 26, 2011 #7839 I am working on a national cable buy and I have to split 20% of impressions into UNequivalized :15 spots from :30. How do I calculate the conversions? The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, March 26, 2011 ): If you mean split 20% of the impressions you would have had if you had bought all :30s, then Assuming all spots deliver equal impressions look at the number of spots you would have bought deduct 20% of the spots and buy double that number of :15s


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, March 27, 2011 ):

The context of your query was explicitly UNequivlized. In this context, :15's and :30's have the same GRP. Thus the :30's you have spilt would then turn into doubled GRP.

Saturday, March 26, 2011 #7839

I am working on a national cable buy and I have to split 20% of impressions into UNequivalized :15 spots from :30. How do I calculate the conversions?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, March 26, 2011 ):

If you mean split 20% of the impressions you would have had if you had bought all :30s, then

  • Assuming all spots deliver equal impressions
  • look at the number of spots you would have bought
  • deduct 20% of the spots and
  • buy double that number of :15s

Thursday, March 24, 2011 #7838

Also, what is the benchmark for the ctr for post (banner) ads and for video pre-roll :15 ads? i am getting conflicting reports on this and need your expertise - thanks guru


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, March 25, 2011 ):

For the Guru, the publicly available 'Benchmark'reports from DoubleClick have always been the authoritative resource. While you might ask any video ad vendor you're considering for reports on their results, and expect some variation in their metrics, the fact that DoubleClick puts an exhaustive annual report out there is reassuring.

Overall CTR is in the neighborhood of 0.10%, and video ads generally do a bit better, but do visit the latest Ad Benchmark report at the link above.

Friday, December 31, 2010 #7822

Q1- What is the difference between media planning audience & media buying audience & how do we measure these if we are working on one brand then how can one brand has two audiences ( buying & planning audience )? Q2- Is media Planning audience & media planning TG is different?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, December 31, 2010 ):

The Guru sees two ways to answer your question:

  • Sometimes a brand's true target is something of an oddball;. Nielsen measures age cells in 3 or 4 year blocks, e.g 18-20 / 21-24 / 25-29 / 20-34, etc. Yet media is typically sold in broader demographic segments like 18-24 or 24-49.. So, your brand may be really aiming at 21-29, but buying 18-34 which is more readily available.
  • OR, Planners use simple GRPs, based on impressions ÷ population. Commercial length is irrelevant to this calculation which might be used to develop Reach and Frequency, etc. However, buyers typically "equivalize" to account for the relative value of :15s vs :30s vs :60s. So a :15 is treated as if it had half the impressions of a :30 when buying. Thus a half-the-:30- price :15 has half the :30 impressions and the same "equivalized" cpm.GRPs are usually not equivalized in this connection.

Thursday, November 18, 2010 #7817

30 sec equivalent CPRP and prime time %. For a given campaign, I have calculated my 30 sec eqiuvalent CPRP's but now need to know my prime time % i.e. the % of my total GRP's that appeared in a defined prime time segement. Can I use gross GRP's to calculate this or should I use 30 sec equivalent CPRP's - does it make any difference. As the 30 sec equivalents are theoretical I am not sure how they can be ascribed back to an actual rating? Many thanks I love the site.


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, November 18, 2010 ):

Typically ":30 equivalent" GRP are arithmetically simple: if a spot is a :15 it's worth half, if a spot is a :60 it's worth double.

Daypart is not a factor at all. Nothing in equivalizing should give any indication of daypart mix.

Perhaps you have an ideosyncratic system? Prime will be the same percent as it was un-equivalized, unless the unit mix varies by daypart, e.g. Prime is all :15 and Day is all :60. If so, you simply have to know these facts.

Thursday, October 14, 2010 #7806

Hi..Greetings from Egypt. I went through your archive and searched all over the internet to desperately find an answer for this question, so please help. The diary gives equal ratings to the spot regardless of its length. Simply assuming that a :5 GRP is the same as a :30 is unrealistic. Also assuming that the :5 is 1/6 of the :30 GRP does not seem right and will ruin the CPP. Is there any formula out there to used by a credible source to convert the GRPs based on duration?


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, October 14, 2010 ):

GRP, like impressions, is simply an audience size measure, so duration is not a part of it.

Many buyers use "equivalized" GRP, which do allow for weighting by length. This is based on using :30 as a standard, and as you surmise, taking a simple ratio based on relative length.

Even in this scenario, it is common to leave the GRP untouched and just manipulate the impressions / cpm.

When :15s were new and various metrics showed they were about 70%+ of the recall value of a :30, that was used as a factor.

If GRP are being used in projecting reach, then the idea of holding GRP equal makes perfect sense; 100 GRP of :05 reaches the same number of persons as 100 GRP of :30, albeit much less effectively. You need to make a judgement call as to relative effectiveness and apply it logically. The Guru is not aware of an established standard for :05s.

Friday, March 05, 2010 #7768

hi, What are equvilent GRPs, and how can they be used?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, March 05, 2010 ):

Equivalent GRPs are usually :30 equivalent. These are used in evaluating competitive activity or comparing plans using different creative units.

One :60 is treated as "equivalent" to 2 :30s. Two :15s are equivalent to one :30.

Some anlayses may apply these factors to Reach and Frequency evaluation.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 #7760

Dear Guru, I have run some data on advertising spending and related GRPs of a number of campaigns. How do I convert the GRPs into 30-second equivalent GRPs?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, February 24, 2010 ):

One :60 is two :30s. One :15 is half a :30

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 #7688

The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, February 05, 2009 ): Bookend :15's are the first and last elements of a commerical break. For all practical, purposes, there is virtually no audience growth from the first to the last, usually just :90 apart. So for reach purposes, they are equivalent to a single commerical unit. This is an informed judgement. But by the definition of GRP, they are two separate exposures of ads. Just like two separate ads in the same issue of a magazine. This is fact. Therefore, the GRP contribution counts both units and reach calculation treats them as one. Dear Media Guru: We, as a buying group, support and understand as an industry standard both :15s in a bookend have the full TRP value of a :30 spot. However, we have been asked to provide documentation to support this fact. Are there any resources you can suggest we could utilize to support this?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, April 22, 2009 ):

This is a matter of standard definitions.

GRP's are simply defined as impressions divided by populaiton universe. An impression is a single exposure of an ad. Length of exposure is NOT a part of the definition. "Documentation" of this fact could be found in any elementary media text or on several web pages with media definitions. Even the wikipedia entry for GRP / TRP is clear on this, although it is written poorly otherwise.

It is entirely reasonable to use judgement to assign different values to TRPs based on their commercial length. It is common to create weighted GRP measures based on length, awareness scores, recall scaores, etc,

Wednesday, February 04, 2009 #7662

I'm not sure I understand your answer to this question below. Perhaps you can explain better with an example? I agree with the person asking the question that it is not right to double the GRPs. Tuesday, November 28, 2006 #7236 Hello Guru my question is about spot TV units called "bookend 15s". I'm not too familiar with them, and not sure I'm asking the question right. I am told that in the process of buying bookends each :15 has to be counted, doubling one's points. Is it wise to halve the points to gauge a more realistic delivery of R&F? It just doesn't feel right to assume the delivery is really doubled, even thought it technically is two exposures. Your opinion is much appreciated, and thanks. The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, December 03, 2006 ): For reach calculation purposes, count the bookend :15s as one unit and use the double GRPs. Frequency then is correcltly more-or-less doubled.


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, February 05, 2009 ):

Bookend :15's are the first and last elements of a commerical break. For all practical, purposes, there is virtually no audience growth from the first to the last, usually just :90 apart. So for reach purposes, they are equivalent to a single commerical unit. This is an informed judgement.

But by the definition of GRP, they are two separate exposures of ads. Just like two separate ads in the same issue of a magazine. This is fact.

Therefore, the GRP contribution counts both units and reach calculation treats them as one.

Friday, January 23, 2009 #7657

Are you aware of an available research on the effectiveness of bookend :15s, i.e., two :15s running in the same commercial pod but seperated by other commercials?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, January 23, 2009 ):

Try The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230. ARF materials will also be available through American Association of Advertising Agencies and Association of National Advertisers.

Monday, December 15, 2008 #7651

Media Guru, We are writing a primer on the value of 10s, 15s, and 30s TV spots for a healthcare client. Although the GRPs gained for each of these length would be in essence, equal, we are trying to determine the features and drawbacks of each. After searching online, we were not able to come up with much. Can you steer us in a clear direction, or do you have a "formula" of when to use each length under different circumstances?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, December 20, 2008 ):

  • :30s are the standard and easiest to place
  • :15s are nominally half the price, although only half the message length. They are best used as reminders or to build frequency once a message has been well established. Availabilities in certain circumstances may be limited, so that the "half price" mark is not always readily achieved
  • :10s are shorter, cheaper and communicates still less well. Availabilies are very limited and prices often do not proportionally reflect the lesser length. Use as billboards is more common.

Monday, August 04, 2008 #7575

What are the pros & cons of running 15 second TV ads or bookend ads?


The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, August 05, 2008 ):


:15's Pros

  • Lower unit costs, which creates opportunities for greater reach and frequency


    Less communication of message
  • Less awareness building
  • Lower recall, possibly even when all savings are reinvested in greater frequency.

Using bookends may offset some of the cons, but not without offsetting the pros. :15s typically cost more than half of a :30.

Friday, January 18, 2008 #7481

Dear Guru, are total weighted 30" GRPs the same as 30" eq. GRPs?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, January 18, 2008 ):

The Guru is not 100% certain what you mean by "eq."

Assuming it is an abbreviation for "equivalent," then it is probably not the same as "weighted."

Equivalent might be a buyers term, analyzing the total value of a buy, accounting for a mix of :15, :30 and longer form units. E.g. :15s are treated as if they had half the GRP of a :30 spot with the same rating.

Weighted :30 GRP is probably more likely to refer to averaging GRP across different markets or population groups.

Thursday, December 06, 2007 #7457

Dear Media Guru, Kindly compare a 15" spot with a 30" one. Sate the advantages & disadvantages in addition to when is each duration better used. Thank You


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, December 06, 2007 ):

In the days when the TV :15 was new and controversial, various studies seemed to find that :15's generated about 77% of the recall of :30"s, which was close to a typical price trade off. So, when the price advantage is better, you can be ahead. On the other hand there is less messaging time, so you may need twice as many spots to convey the same information or you may find the message can't be effectively conveyed in a :15.

In today's clutter and DVR zipping climate :15's are easier than ever to miss or fail to capture the viewer.

:15's are best used as reminders in a well established campaign.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007 #7365

I need to assign a media value to a client-sponsored radio promotion. The promotion includes an online contest, station promos (a mix of :30s and :15s), and a station remote including live call-ins. How do I assign media values? Is the value different if there is more than one sponsor? If so, should I apply a value percentage depending on the number of sponsors? Thanks!


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, June 17, 2007 ):

First give a value to the solo :30's and :15's equivalent to their selling price at the station. Divide shared ones by the number or participating advertsiers. Stand-alone remotes also have a rate card value, and you must estimate a negotiated price depending on the size of your other spending with the station. The value of a contest itself is very subjective.

Monday, December 18, 2006 #7248

Dear Guru Ė We are planning to launch an automotive advertising Web portal in January serving Pittsburgh/southwestern PA. The primary income stream will come from local auto dealerships that will pay to advertise their used cars on the site. In order to justify their expense, I need to ensure that enough car shoppers visit the site to search for vehicles, resulting in sales leads for the dealers. I believe we will need to get about 1500 local visitors to the site each month in order to show enough value to the dealers. I have received much appreciated advice from the Guru in the past in which you recommended online advertising, which I plan to do using pay-per-click services through the search engines. I have also budgeted for TV and radio advertising, but you expressed concern with my planned ad frequency. Unfortunately, my budget is only about $12k/month. I currently have proposals from local broadcast TV and radio stations. Here are the stats on each medium: - Google, Yahoo and Ask pay-per-click ads, with an estimated 500 total clicks (canít seem to get more regardless of what Iím willing to pay for each click) for about $1500. - Two-week radio schedule, 70 total spots (:15s), alternating weeks with a 5.0 frequency and 150k reach/wk (M25-54) for about $3k - Three-week TV schedule, alternating weeks with 95 total spots (:15s) and 750k gross impressions (M25-54) for about $7k My radio and TV commercials are :15s that can run independently or can be combined to create :30s. My questions are: 1) Do these TV and radio rates seem reasonable? 2) Is television advertising really worth so much more than radio advertising? 3) Assuming that the website/concept is useful and interesting, do you believe that this plan can return the 1500 visitor response that we need? 4) Would I be better off to focus my advertising dollars differently? Thanks for your help.


The Media Guru Answers(Tuesday, December 19, 2006 ):

  1. Rates seem reasonable
  2. Your TV seems to cost less than radio, on a cpm basis: TV is $7,000 for 750,000 impressions / cpm = $9.33. Radio is $3,000 for 300,000 impressions / cpm=$10
  3. The plan could generate the 1,500 visitors.

    Revisit your search engines' traffic estimator. When the the Guru tested "car" and "cars" on Google in Pittsburgh, he found about 250 clicks per day available. You may need different search terms.

  4. Consider where to find people interested in used cars. Isn't most used car advertising in newspaper classifieds currently? Consider print and online advertising in newspaper and newspaper websites' used car sections.

Tuesday, November 28, 2006 #7236

Hello Guru my question is about spot TV units called "bookend 15s". I'm not too familiar with them, and not sure I'm asking the question right. I am told that in the process of buying bookends each :15 has to be counted, doubling one's points. Is it wise to halve the points to gauge a more realistic delivery of R&F? It just doesn't feel right to assume the delivery is really doubled, even thought it technically is two exposures. Your opinion is much appreciated, and thanks.


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, December 03, 2006 ):

For reach calculation purposes, count the bookend :15s as one unit and use the double GRPs. Frequency then is correcltly more-or-less doubled.

Monday, October 30, 2006 #7217

I plan to buy local/spot cable in 8 DMAs. We will likely be using :15 DR spots (bookends)-I heard something along the lines of, "DR doesn't work on cable." Is this true or to be ignored?


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, October 30, 2006 ):

There is a lot of DR on local cable . . . a lot. One thing about DR is certain: the practitioners know what works, they wouldn't be back if something didn't work.

The Guru would note that :15 seems like a short time to complete a sell and give contact info. And short bookends around cluttered breaks seems questionable too, especially if it's a divided sell / contact info message.

Friday, August 04, 2006 #7174

Dear Guru - In a past posting I mentioned that, in addition to online advertising, I am planning a TV and radio campaign to drive traffic to my web site. I was planning for about 35 to 40 0:30 spots per month each for radio and TV, however you suggested that this is a little light, at least for radio. I have since looked at focusing my message, and I believe I can create an effective 0:15 message for both media, nearly doubling my placements for about the same budget. My question is, do you think that 70 to 80 0:15 placements each for radio and TV is more in line for a monthly schedule? Also, should I be running the same number of ads on radio and TV, or does one require more time than the other? Thanks as always. -Rich


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, August 07, 2006 ):

Reach and frequency-wise, this is better, but usineg :15's alone in radio is a questionable approach.

Radio, engaging only one sense needs more messaging than TV. A longer message and more of them is the rule-of-thumb.

Sunday, January 22, 2006 #7077

GRP is one of the most important pilars of TV planning. a 5 sec TVC, a 30 sec TVC and a 60 sec TVC will achieve the same rating point in a diary type of survey. why should we go for 30sec TVC and not 5sec TVC? CPRP will definitely be cheaper. I do understand the difference in Impact value. Do you have any article on the difference between 5sec, 10sec, 15sec, 30sec and 60sec? which length is the most impactful? Thank you


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, January 22, 2006 ):

As a rule, longer is stronger. Go to the Guru Archives Search Engine. Use "length" as your search term. There was enormous trade coverage of the issue when :15's came into vogue in the early 80's.

Friday, November 18, 2005 #7051

Can you direct me to any available research on the difference in recall between :10 second tv and :15 second tv?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, November 20, 2005 ):

Try The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230. ARF materials will also be available through American Association of Advertising Agencies and Association of National Advertisers.

Wednesday, May 11, 2005 #6919

Do you have any Hispanic oriented studies that speak about the effectiveness factor of 30s vs. 15s? Is it the same as the General Market?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, May 15, 2005 ):

The Guru has not seen comparisons of :30 vs :15 specific to the Hispanic market. As Hispanic TV may still be somewhat less cluttered, the ratio may be a bit better.

Monday, April 25, 2005 #6905

How much does a 15 second radio spot usually cost? How much would it cost to advertise on a standard outdoor billboard?


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, April 25, 2005 ):

Where available, :15's will typically cost 60 to 70% of the cost of a :60.

To the Guru, a "standard outdoor billboard" is a 30-sheet (12' x 24'). Average cost is in the range of $750.

Friday, February 25, 2005 #6814

Guru, we run :15 television spots as bookends in a commercial pod. My client wishes to count each :15 spot (2 per pod) as seperate commercials, i.e. counting GRPs as if each spot were a seperate :30. We do not recommend this, we recommend that two 15 spots are counted as one :30 spot. Do you have any research that proves the agency theory? Thank you!


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, February 25, 2005 ):

It depends on what you are doing, what conclusions you will draw from the GRPs. If you are projecting reach, then you must count these the same as single :30 units. If you are looking at cpm analysis and adjust :15 for value relative to :30, then again, it's more appropirate to evalue as if one :30. Actually, the Guru would be curious to learn the client's reasoning.

Wednesday, February 09, 2005 #6785

Are you aware of any recent research regarding the relationship between length of commercials (:15's vs. :60's) and their effectiveness with the 18-34 age group?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, February 12, 2005 ):

Not specifically. Try TV Bureau of Advertising and The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230. ARF materials will also be available through American Association of Advertising Agencies and Association of National Advertisers.

Monday, August 02, 2004 #6560

Dear Guru: In one of your answers re efficiency of :15 spots vs :30 you said: "In a campaign, these latter measures may mean overall recall and impact favor :15s, if the message can be communicated". Can you give me any references to such studies. The references I have been referred to so far support the opposite view: "Television viewers' attitudes and recall of 15 second and versus 30 secund commercials. James S.Gould" and "Max Sutherland & Alice Sylvester "Advertising and the mind of the consumer". Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, August 06, 2004 ):

The issue is what do you measure; under almost any circumstances, a :30 has better recall than a :15. But the consumer experince is not about seeing a :15 or a :30. If a campaign has 50 to 100% more exposures because it is executed in ;15, the reach and frequency will definitely be increased and if the ;15 communicates the message, overall effect may be better. It's about camaign versus creative. i.e the media director view rather than the creative director view.

Friday, October 24, 2003 #6217

What is the rationale for using a mix of :30 and :15 second spots vs. either alone?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, October 26, 2003 ):

:15s cost less than :30s. Therefore, replacing some :30 spots with :15s extends the schedule, yielding added reach / frequency / impressions, etc.

:30s generally communicate more / better than :15s. Often a schedule begins as all-:30 before :15s are mixed in once the message ius established.

Monday, October 13, 2003 #6205

Dear Guru, Regarding your response to my earlier question about traffic sponsorships (#6182), the :10s do allow for last minute changes. The :15s are produced. How will this effect the weighting? Do you have a recommended weighting that should be applied? Thanks again.


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, October 18, 2003 ):

This difference is not something for which the Guru would apply weighting. Ask yourself: Is there an advantage to last mintue changes? Is your product weather related, (like rain boots)? Or traffic situation related (like cellphones)? Or is it subject to frequent price change, like bank rates? If there is no advantage to last minute changes, ignore it. If there is then that may be far more impoirtant than copy length.

Tuesday, September 30, 2003 #6182

Dear Media Guru, In our market we have two companies that offer radio traffic sponsorships. I have been asked by a client to compare the two in order to show which one offers the best exposure and the best "bang for the buck." One company offers live :10 reads on over 19 stations the other offers taped :15s on 9 stations. I know that I can use strata to combine all the stations for each group to get an overall rating average, but I am wondering if I should weight the ratings since these are not :60s. What do you advise? Also, besides, grps, cpp and cpm is there any other data that I should include in my comparision to show the strengths or weaknesses of each group? Thanks! KJG


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, October 04, 2003 ):

Weighting is reasonable. Do the "live" versions allow last minute changes? If "live" means simple announcer script, but taped meand full production, you need to quantify the difference. It might be more significant than just the length difference.

Tuesday, July 01, 2003 #6055

Dear Guru, My client sets share of voice objectives and requires us to outvoice competition during any week. That was fine till now, until someone convinced him that he should be looking at Weighted GRPs (weighted by copy duration). He started to argue that for weeks he has been outvoiced bec. his competition is using a longer copy duration. I need to have your opinion on the above. Also, would appreciate if you could provide me with a solid documentation that argues against using Weghted GRPs if that is your belief. Thanks !


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, July 07, 2003 ):

When thinking in terms of "outvoicing" competition, it is perfectly reasonable to allow for copy length differences. If we didn't think longer copy was more effective, all TV advertisng would be :15 or less.

Thursday, April 10, 2003 #5929

Dear Guru: What is the piggybacking strategy (in marketing/media/communication fields)?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, April 13, 2003 ):

In media, piggy-backing refers to such actions as combining two :15 second commercial executions into one :30 commerical to get the pricing advantage of a :30. By extension, piggy-backing can mean any ad riding along with another.

Tuesday, March 04, 2003 #5865

What are the pros and cons of using a :15 tv spot versus a :30 tv spot? Does emotional based creative work well in a smaller unit size, like a :!5 tv spot? Thanks, WP


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, March 08, 2003 ):

By any measure of impact, e.g. recall, persuasion, etc. :30's will always beat :15s, one for one. By measures of media communications, e.g, reach, frequency, GRPs, impressions, :15's will always beat :30's, in a campaign. In a campaign, these latter measures may mean overall recall and impact favor :15s, if the message can be communicated.

Monday, September 09, 2002 #5503

Dear Media Guru: I have read in some of your previous responses that the rule-of-thumb wear-out level for a typical 30" TV copy is about 2000 GRPs. What would the wearout level be for a 15" copy, about 1500 GRPs (75% of the 30")? And what about a 5" copy? Thank you. R.


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, September 12, 2002 ):

The 2000 GRP level related to quintiles of frequency of exposure, therefore the copy length chage does not inherently call for a change. Is there a reason to think the :15 wears out faster than the :30? 75% is an impact or recall ratio. If rcall were less, wear out might be, too.

Friday, August 30, 2002 #5498

Dear Media Guru: I am launching a brand. I have a 30" TV copy and a 15" version of it. I am planning 2 flights with a break of a couple of weeks between them. What mixig options are used in such cases: a) use only 30" copy in the first flight and 15" in the second, or b) do both flights similarly - 30" in the first half of the flight and 15" in the second, or c) mix both from the very beginning, say at 70/30 (because this is a launch). Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, September 02, 2002 ):

There's no hard and fast rule. One may introduce at 100% :30 and then mix in a portion of :15s or any other approach. The similarity and relative strenght of the two pieces of copy are important.

Monday, June 24, 2002 #5376

Where can I find articles on the effectiveness of 30 second versus 15 second TV commericals? Also, is there an ideal mix for creative rotation?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, June 30, 2002 ):

Such articles were common in the trade media at the dawn of :15's. Roughly the late 70's.

There is no ideal mix. Generally the acceptable balance changes as the campaign matures when the message has been established by :30's and the :15's can be an effective reminder. But it's always a judgement call.

Wednesday, February 20, 2002 #5099

For Spot Market Radio only (not TV), when utilizing a "produced" fifteen second (:15) piece of creative (that clearly delivers the client's desired message), do you adjust the time period AQH rating down because the spot lenght is less than the standard :60 unit or do you give it the full AQH rating? These produced spots are not billboards or sposorships. I realize in TV that the rating is not affected by spot length. Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, February 20, 2002 ):

Why would the rating be affected by length in radio but not TV? Rating, in any medium, is purely about the number in the audience. Any adjustments the planner applies to the rating, based on effectiveness or attentiveness, according to audience reaction or response, etc. do not change the size of the audience.

Thursday, February 07, 2002 #5067

Is there an industry standard, on the agency side, for ratings of a five, ten or fifteen second television spot? If the spot clearly gets your full message out in a :10 or :15, wouldn't it get a full rating? These are not sponsorships. Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, February 10, 2002 ):

Rating is not effected by commercial length. Rating is simply about the number of viewers. Other factors might be applied judgmentally to adjust ratings according to commercial length, based on research regarding recall or effectiveness.

Thursday, January 03, 2002 #4973

Can you please explain the difference between TV network and spot buying. What is the equivalize and non-equivalize concept. Why is it used in network buying and not in spot(units are not equivalized). Also can you please explain the reweight concept. How do you come up with reweight cpm. Why can you just do a straight year cpm comparison.


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, January 04, 2002 ):

Click here to see past Guru responses about equivalizing. "Why use it?" is a good question regardless of the network versus spot element. The use of equivalence is an artifact of mass buying by corporation wherein large numbers of :15's and :30s are bought but need to be readily comparable. In spot, this type of buying is less common. Also, network :15s are almost alwasy priced at 50% of :30's making equivalence simple. In spot the ratio is usually higher, and inconsistent.

In network, the geography for CPP / CPM is consistent, so that CPP and CPM can be converted back and forth based on simple multiplication or divsion by the relevant demographic universe. In spot however, while CPP is based on the defined DMA (or occasionally metro) geography, CPM is based on impressions generated anywhere, so there is no simple mathematical relationship.

For other network buying concepts use the Go to the Guru Archives Search Engine.

Thursday, November 15, 2001 #4894

Will you please explain the math and rationale for equivalizing :15s in broadcast tv? I keep hearing the term, but my buyer couldn't clearly explain it. She also said she didn't believe in doing it. Do you? Thanks as always!


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, November 15, 2001 ):

Buyers and planners look at this process differently. In actual fact, a :15 and a :30 in the same program have the same audience, but different costs.

To planners the audience is more important, in its relationship to reach, etc.

Buyers, however are more cost and efficiency focused at the program level. They will simplify avails by assignninig everything the :30 price and using a factored audience to reflect the :15 efficiency.

Tuesday, July 10, 2001 #4564

Hi Guru! I am looking for any statistics on the use of piggybacked :30s (to make one :60) in radio and :15s (to make one :30) in TV to increase awareness/ effectiveness. Does this technique help?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, July 11, 2001 ):

The Guru doesn't follow your reasoning. Are you expecting that repeating a :15 twice in thirty seconds will have more effectiveness ore build more awarness than stand-alone :15s at the same budget or more than whole :30s at that budget?

Pairs of piggy-backed :15s in TV will no doubt yield less awareness than stand-alone :15s, because the reach will be less. As to effectiveness, you need to define that in terms of awareness, intent to purchase, sales results etc. Pairs of piggy backed :15s versus whole :30's would yield the same reach. There might be more awareness because of the apparent error, but there will be reduced message content.

For research try The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230.

Tuesday, December 05, 2000 #4018

What are the pros/cons of 30 minute infomercial-type spots compared to :15, :30, or :60 spots with respect to production, unit cost, response, reach/frequency, target audience, etc.? Would the type of product be a factor in deciding whether to run :30 minute spots? Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, December 06, 2000 ):

The questions are essentially direct marketing issues, but as to the media points included:

  • Unit cost: In the same time periods, :30s cost about half of :60s. :15s cost 50-75% as much as :30s. Half hours cost much more but not proportionatly more. This become tricky, because half hours are usually only sold at less popular, lowere price tiems so comparisons to standard, ROS commercials are decieving. Similarly short commercials bought at direct response rates are supposedly priced at half of normal rates but run in less desirable times and are highly pre-emptible.
  • Reach/frequency: A :15 spot has the same reeach as a 30 minute program at the same time. Since there will be many more different announcements with short commercials than half hours, for a given budget, the short commercials have better R&F, the shorter the better on this score. But direct response isn't usually evaluated on an R&F basis.
  • Target audience depends on time slot and not advertising length.
  • Response varies, based more on offer and execution than on format.

Thursday, November 30, 2000 #4005

What are the strengths and weakenesses of using a :30 television spot vs. a :10 television spot. And vice- versa?


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, December 02, 2000 ):

The sole advantage of a :10 is that it is cheaper than a :30, usually about half the price. This advantage may be turned into added frequency and reach.

But it is a message that may be half --or less -- as effective.

:10s are not as freely available so using the added frequency potential may not be realistic. :15's are the more commonly available short form.

Monday, November 27, 2000 #3990

Hi, is there any trend data regarding the length of TV commercials? Are they generally getting longer or shorter?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, November 29, 2000 ):

In the US, over the long term, TV commercials have become shorter, but for many years there has been no movement beyond a certain level of :15's. Radio has seen a return to more :60's as the pricing of :30's has become the same as :60's.

Monday, November 27, 2000 #3989

Is there an international trends that the durations of TV commercials are becoming longer or shorter or no specific trend ?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, November 29, 2000 ):

In the US, over the long term, TV commercials have become shorter, but for many years there has been no movement beyond a certain level of :15's. Radio has seen a return to more :60's as the pricing of :30's has become the same as :60's.

In other countries your milage may vary.

Saturday, July 29, 2000 #3664

Do you know where I may find research of the impact or effectiveness of bookend :15's or airing 2 spots in 1 commercial pod. Thank-you


The Media Guru Answers(Saturday, July 29, 2000 ):

The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230.

Friday, May 26, 2000 #3497

Dear Media Guru, Not long ago I came across the statement that audio and video spots do not work if they are shorter than 20". Please, give me some comments about this. If it is possible, can you ad your comments with some references on this theme.


The Media Guru Answers(Monday, May 29, 2000 ):

It seems a ridiculous statement, considering the popularity of :15 TV commercials today. Were you reading old trade journals? 20 years ago, when TV :60s were the norm, they said the same thing about :30s. Comparing one unit versus the other, there will always be an advantage to the longer execution. But in the real world, one gets double the advertising, or perhaps 3 for every two. :15's work through added frequency if for no other reason.

Research is plentiful. Contact The Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter. For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230.

Wednesday, May 17, 2000 #3483

Can you give :15 second bookend television commercials double the rating since the commercial is airing "twice?"


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, May 17, 2000 ):

It depends on who is asking and why, so the answer is yes and no.

If the two :15's were in different pods, 10 minutes apart, the answer would be a simple yes. Whether the should not count a two commercials because they are only about 2 minutes apart is a judgement call, communications-wise.

Tuesday, December 14, 1999 #3053

I have a production department and account manager that want to produce a :60 TV spot. I know that we need a :30. I need to give them (and the client) a concrete argument as to why :60's are too expensive to produce and place and the effectiveness of a :30 is what we need. I know that :15's can be 70-80% as effective as :30's - but I don't know numbers on the effective of :60's - help


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, December 19, 1999 ):

When :30's were a new idea, research showed them to be about 75% as effective as :60's. Now that they are coin-of-the-realm, the ratio has probably improved. Even if less than half as effective as a :60, the reach/frequency and recency contibutions of running twice as many spots would outweigh this unit impact issue.

It is a mistake to consider only one execution vs another when it is the campaign that should be evaluated in measuring effectiveness.

The research should be at the Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230.

Wednesday, July 14, 1999 #2632

What are GRP's and what do they stand for in a media buy? I am an Account Manager and don't have the Media background but need to explain the GRP levels to my Product Managers. Please help.


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, July 15, 1999 ):

GRPs are gross rating points, the pounds and ounces of media buying and selling. The target audience of an advertisement divided by the population of the target group is the ad's rating. The sum of the ratings of the ads is the Gross Rating Points. Plans specify how many GRPs of each medium to buy. For print, specifications are more often numbers of insertions in specific titles, but the GRPs can be calculated the same way and one plan compared to another.

Allowance must be made for :15 versus :30 GRP or half page versus full page. A given program or magazine has the same rating (GRP) whatever the ad size/length, but obviously there is more benefit from 100 GRP of :30s or pages than from 100 GRPs of :15s or half pages.

Friday, July 09, 1999 #2620

Hello GURU ! I have 2 questions for you : 1. One of the media analysis we do in our agency,mainly for TV, consists in comparing a competitor's share of spending (calculated as his % of advertising expenditure within the total category) with his share of voice (calculated as the % of his 30 sec equivalent GRPs within the category). Is this correct in your opinion ? 2. How do you define SOV ? Is this the % of the GRPs one achieve within a category or is it the % of money invested by an advertiser within a category in a certain period ? Thanks.


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, July 11, 1999 ):

1) What do you do with the results of this comparison? How does the ratio of SO$ to SOV help you make decisions? The :30 equivalent step is reasonable, but how do you do that effectively outside of broadcast?

2) Some use SOV to refer to share of spending, others use it to refer to share of weight. The Guru believes share of weight is more descriptive of the marketplace perceived by the consumer, but the person controlling the budget, that is, the client, more often cares about money. They can see the impact of money on the bottom line more easily than they can understand the differences in impact of their :30s versus a competitor's :15s or competitor's radio versus their own magazines.

Friday, July 09, 1999 #2619

Given some historic data on consumer awareness and media spends, how do i go about in modelling the same so as to enable me to make decisions on future media spends for a brand or new execution for a brand?


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, July 11, 1999 ):

Like any model, the more data you can include, the better the result.

Obviously, it is too simplistic to assume a simple direct correlation of money spent to awareness.

Other factors could be unit ad/size/coloration; the same money spent in :60 TV would have a different effect than if spent in :15s. Reach and frequenccy, daypart mix in the broadcast media and media mix are key factors within media data, but other factors outside media measures may be more significant, such as copy quality, brand maturity, proir awareness, share of voice, etc.

Thursday, July 08, 1999 #2616

Hello Guru! I would like to ask you what is a 30 sec equivalent GRP and why is that calculated if the spot length (as per some of your previous answers) do not influence yhe level of reach&frequency ? Thanks


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, July 08, 1999 ):

:30 equivalent is a buyer's convenience. Assuming the standard unit purchased is a :30, instead of dealing with different unit rates in the same program, a :15 is treated as if it had half the rating. It's strictly an efficiency/value issue and has no impact on reach or frequency. Remember that the ratings we have are actually the ratings of programs or time periods and not commercials; commercials are just assigned the rating of the time slot wherin they air, so commercial length is irrelevant to rating.

Wednesday, July 07, 1999 #2613

Dear Guru, I'm trying to locate an article or research that reflects consumer recall of a :15 bookend vs. a :30 spot. I've tried the 4As and all they have are articles of :15 stand alones vs. :30s. Please let me know where Ican find this. Thank you.


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, July 07, 1999 ):

The best source is the Advertising Research Foundation InfoCenter For details about the InfoCenter, call 212-751-5656, extension 230, but the 4A's would have checked there for you, usually

Thursday, July 01, 1999 #2599

Any ideas on creative placement/positioning of :10 & :15 second TV & Cable spots? We have, of course, selected programs and networks that reach our target audience based on ratings and qualitative info; however, our challenge goes beyond that. We've reviewed book-ending, road blocking, double spotting, and stripping, but can't quit seem to get that "ooh-aah" factor going. Any thoughts???


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, July 02, 1999 ):

"Ooh-aah" is a lot to expect from commercial position alone. First in pod is a favorite. Roadblocking is meaningless today. It was powerful when TV audience share was 90+% for the big 3 networks in Prime time, during the 60's and 70's.

The best ooh-aah, the Guru recalls, was use of the program star, in character, in setting, to pitch the product. A specific example was Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko telling his corporals about the wonders of Luck Strike cigarettes. But this was in the day of full program sponsorship, when the advertiser owned the program. It might be possible today with a fully- or half- sponsored special.

Such "product integration" is still available today on the Spanish language networks, at least.

But of course :10s and :15s offere less flexibility than :30s and integration is really long-form.

Tuesday, February 02, 1999 #2302

Our web site is an educational application delivered over the web. The user spend most of the time interacting with a Java applet that refreshes the educational content. I want to sell advertising on the page but am not sure how to measure CPM since the user stays on one page. I intend to dynamically refresh the advertising while the user is on the page. It would seem to make sense to sell the spots by the number of seconds the banner runs. Is there a standard for how long an ad should run to count as an impression?


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, February 04, 1999 ):

The TV standards are generally :15, :30, :60. These standards are not usually used on the internet except for full animation ads like those on the Pointcast service. Web cpms are based on exposures of the ad to visitors, and counting repeats, if delivered on different pages, is considered fair game.

Logically, your user is focused on the site's content, therefore pricing ads based on duration will be a tough sell, in the Guru's opinion.

Wednesday, January 27, 1999 #2291

Is there any research out there regarding the effectivness (or non-effectiveness) of :15 TV ads compared to :30's? I am also trying to find out when does it make sense to run a :15. If you could answer these questions or point me in the right direction, I would appreciate it.


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, January 27, 1999 ):

Most research on the :15 vs :30 issue dates back several years to the rise of the :15.

The Guru has discussed this frequently. Click here to see past guru responses on :15's

Wednesday, June 03, 1998 #1882

how much more effective is an exposure on print compared to TV in case of consumer durables?


The Media Guru Answers(Wednesday, June 03, 1998 ):

A TV exposure is generally more effective than a print exposure. However:

  • There can be very bad TV executions and very good print executions, which outweigh the general rule.
  • A TV :15 may not be more effective than a 4 color bleed gatefold off the 2nd cover.
  • Media plans don't usually operate in an exposure vs exposure mode. A given budget might buy 25 TV exposures for every print exposure or vice versa, depending on ad units, programming, geographic coverage, etc.

Thursday, May 14, 1998 #1592

Dear Guru, There are two questions I wish to address to you: 1. Is there any rule of thumb regarding the weight of 10'' spots? How effective can a relatively 'small' campaign composed chiefly of such short spots can be? By a small campaign I mean one that has arounc 300-400 GRP. 2. When it comes to factors that either enhance or lessen the effectiveness of a campaign, are there any conventions regarding the use of relevant factors? The order in a break may be a more familiar example but there are other factors that one may incorporate to a media plan, e.g whether the commercial is new or not. Thank you so much for the attention Iris Kalka Pelled3 Communications


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, May 14, 1998 ):

1) The Guru's rule of thumb in general, is if the effectiveness - relative to a :30 - is better than the price ratio, a :10 can be a good investment. In the early days of :15s in the U.S., they were evaluated as about 75% as effective as :30s, and sold for 50%, so they were popular. The Guru believes he has seen research to say a :10 is worth 75% of a :15.

However, you are posting from Israel. Your local standards may be different, because of the different culture and different media environment, clutter, media mix, etc. If you can ascertain a local effectiveness ratio, you can make an informed decision.

In any case, the Guru believes these short executions are best used as a supplement to longer copy. The Guru does not believe most creative people would be comfortable with only :10 copy and just 300-400 GRP. 2) The number of factors, such as break position, age of commercial, complexity of message, product interest, etc, which can be influential is almost infinite. The relative influence is a judgement call. Evaluating through a logical process, by establishing your rules and executing them, is best.

The Guru has seen these factors used to develop an effective frequency basis for a media plan's communication goals. In this way all considerations come down to a single number.

Thursday, May 07, 1998 #1584 to achieve better reach in lesser media budget? 2.please provide some tips on clever media planning. 3.who is best media planner as per you and why?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, May 08, 1998 ):

1. If reach is the only concern then it is usually easy to find media with higher reach per dollar. For example, outdoor delivers enormous reach and has the lowest cpm of all traditional media.

Smaller units also stretch budgets without losing reach. Fractional pages or TV :15's instead of :30's, radio :30's instead of :60s also help.

But of course, there are other, copy effectiveness and impact issues associated with these media choices. There is always a trade off; you can't get more reach in the same media for less money, unless you can persuade the sellers to lower the prices.

2. Clever media planning includes some of the ideas above, but also requires a planner to sell the ideas for their benefits, and get past the negatives. The goal of media planning is to deliver on the marketing objectives.

"Clever" is doing it in non-standard ways. Can you persuade the media to create special programming which ties into your campaign? Can you show the media a benefit to them in carrying your ads so that they want to resduce the price or give more than the usual value added elements?

If the Guru has one real tip on clever planning it is: Learn to use and understand the research which is available. Few in media today do. An knowledge of what research is available and how to apply it to media decision making will make a planner stand out, and appear clever and creative, because that planner, in fact, will be so.

3. The Guru himself is the best planner he knows. The nature of the media planner's position in the ad business is to be subordinated to creative and account services. There is little chance for planners to become known beyond their agencies. No doubt the "best media planner" lurks in unsung obscurity in a hundred agencies.

Thursday, October 09, 1997 #1427

Does the length of the commercial determine the amount of grps reached? If I schedule a 30ss and achieve X amount of grps, and schedule a 15ss the same amount of times I achieve the same amount of grp's as with the 30ss?


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, October 10, 1997 ):

Very simply, yes. Whether they are watching for 15 or 30 seconds, the audience of the commercial is the same, so the GRPs are the same(never mind theories of channel switching, or we'd be adjusting commercial audiences based on partial viewing).

What can be confusing is that TV buyers often use formulas requiring :15's to be treated as if they had half the rating of a :30 in the same time slot, so that they can most readily calculate a ":30 equivalent" c.p.m. or Cost Per Point.

Thursday, June 19, 1997 #1366

Dear Guru, I have a set of urgent questions to ask of you. I have a meeting tomorrow, and need your help! 1. How is effective reach calculated? 2. Reach v/s Frequency -- when should one be given priority / importance over the other? 3. Is there any way of taking creative into account while analysing competition? If yes, can a system of weights be worked out? 4. How do you reconcile to the vast difference between reach/frequency deliveries from a Peoplemeter system as opposed to the Diary system? My client refuses to accept a 4+ reach of 30% being accustomed to levels of 70% for the same plan! Would greatly appreciate your immediate reply.


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, June 19, 1997 ):

1) In any schedule of several commercials, some of the target group will see only one, some will see two, some will see three, some will see four, some five, etc, etc.

The actual measurement is based on tracking the cume of several different advertisers schedules in a single measurement period such as one month of the PeopleMeter.

A mathematical model that will match the measured GRP/Frequency is calculated so that plan deliveries can be predicted. Going more deeply into the actual measurement, it can be determined how many people of each demographic group were exposed to each commercial in the schedule and a model calculated which will predict that performance for a plan.

For example, below is the typical output of a computer models' frequency distribution, showing what percent of the target saw exactly n commercials and what percent saw n+. (this example is from Telmar's ADplus):

                    Frequency (f) Distributions 
                                  % who saw
                          #seen exactly  at least     
                          ----- -------  -------
               Target:      f     rch    rch    
               P18-49      ---   -----  -----   
                            0     69.1  100.0   
                            1     11.5   30.9    
                            2      6.0   19.3    
                            3      3.7   13.4   
                            4      2.6    9.6   
                            5      1.8    7.1    
                            6      1.3    5.2   
                            7      1.0    3.9   
                            8      0.7    2.9   
                            9      0.6    2.2   
                           10+     1.6    1.6   
                           20+     0.0    0.0    

2) Reach vs Frequency: The determination of emphasis here can be a complicated analysis making up the greater part of a plan's documentation, under the heading of "communications strategy." A commercial so powerful that it's sell is overwhelming in one exposure might take the "Let's buy one spot in the Superbowl" route as did the Macintosh computer with the classic "1984" execution.

In more competitive situations, competitors' levels are taken into account, clutter in the media of choice, copy quality, etc. Obviously a balance must eventually be struck between reach and frequency based on judging all these factors.

3) There are several ways to take creative into account while setting up reach vs frequency goals;

The complexity or simplicity of the message

The number of commercial in the pool

how close your commercial is to the established "wear-out" level

The balance of :30 to :15

etc, etc. can all be assigned factors and totalled or averaged to give a reach vs frequency emphasis factor

a similar exercise can also set effective frequency thresholds

4) There should not be "vast" differences between effective reaches based on people meter and diary systems if schedule GRP and other aspects are the same. 5 or 10% would be the range the Guru would expect.

A plan with a 70 reach at the 4+ level would be delivering in the range of 98% total reach. It sounds as if your client may be confusing a plan with 70 reach and an average frequency of 4 with 70 at an effective frequency of 4. Or perhaps confusing 4-week reach with a long term cume?

Friday, May 17, 1996 #1213

Dear Guru,I have two questions which you might have heard before.
a)I do know that a :15s commercial on TV cost between 50% to 75% of a :30s depending on market etc. Is there any studies that show what the benefit of either length is (if any) in terms of reach, frequency, effectiveness, memorability, etc.
b)I have seen studies praising the advantage of multiple media usage above single media; in other words using TV and radio instead of just TV. Can you elaborate on that and update with new info about this topic. Reason being a client who would like to slash the budget down to just using TV for campaigns. I however feel that there is an added benefit in using multiple media.Please respond by Monday if you can.Thanks.


The Media Guru Answers(Sunday, May 19, 1996 ):

a) There is is no difference in reach and frequency between a :15 and a :30. In the same time period, they have the same audience, within the tolerances of research measurement.

On the other hand, a schedule using :15's in place of some or all the :30's will provide more reach and frequency, because it has more announcements, hence more GRP, etc, for the same budget.

When :15's started to become popular several years ago, there was considerable research regarding effectiveness versus :30's. The general findings were that :15's had about 70 - 75% of the recall of a :30. At the time, :15's were typically a network option priced at 50% of :30's so the trade off of price vs effectiveness seemed favorable.

b) Multi-media plans chief benefit is in reach development, though the effects of the added reach have ripples in many directions.

Adding a new medium adds more reach than adding weight in the same medium: There are more likely to be different people in the audience of a different medium, over a given period of time. This applies to effective reach as well.

There are a variety of philosophical approaches to taking advantage of this.

One approach says to build reach up to a minimum effective level in the primary medium first, before adding the next medium. Another says build the first medium to the point where the reach curve flattens, then add the next medium to resume reach growth.

A newer, different line of thought, the "recency" theory, de-emphasizes reach in favor of delivering messages to the consumer closest to the point of making a purchas decison. This argues for continuity, to reach more people at all times rather than highest levels in sporadic flights. Again, multi-media will produce more reach, but other theories of minimum weekly levels may effect scheduling, ie radio bought to a minimum of 12x weekly when active.

Judgements must also be made regarding whether TV and radio is perceived as the same message by the consumer. Of course, this same judgement must be applied to different executions in the commercial pool of each individual medium as well.

Friday, February 16, 1996 #1760

Dear Mr. Guru, Thank you for your last reponse on how to calculate GRP's. You had mentioned that you had explained it fully except for Neilson's calculation methodology. I would be interested in hearing more about this method of calculation as well. Also, is there a "better" way to measure the actual "Impact" an ad campaign has had if you know the actual length of each ad, the frequency the ads ran and the channels(and shows) that they ran during. ie. frequency X length X Audience(rate for each time slot)?? This is obviously a simplified formula, but your feedback on this would be greatly appreciated. Lastly, for television advertising, what are some of the other accepted methods of measurement. Thanks (Again)


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, February 16, 1996 ):

It is Neilsen's survey methodology that wasn't covered. They would use the same calculation formulae. The full description of Neilsens methodologies for People Meter, household meter and diary would cover several pages. Contact Neilsen who will be happy to send you methodology booklets.

Regarding "impact" there are as many ways to evaluate this as there are advertisers.

Some advertisers use a factor for copy length based on norms from recall tests. For example, 75% of a :30 is a typical value for a :15.

Some use attentiveness by daypart.

Some use a combination of the two factors.

Some apply the factors to GRP as an indicator; some apply to GRPs and then estimate reach from those adjusted GRPs as an impact indicator.

The frequency of a schedule, as discussed so far, refers to the average frequency of exposure for all pesons reached.

There are those who use "effective reach," counting only persons reached at least 3 times (or any designated minimum) when evaluating the impact of a schedule.

Thursday, January 04, 1996 #1802

How do television and radio advertisers value an impression? That is, if someone advertises on television is there a formula used to determine prices for :15, :30 and :60 spots? Thanks.


The Media Guru Answers(Friday, February 02, 1996 ):

As a general rule, :30 impressions are the standard reference for TV and :60 for radio. "value" and "price" may or may not correlate:

In TV, a :60 is usually double a :30's price but has the same value in reach. Some advertisers use attentiveness or recall factors to adjust the "value" of a :60 vs a :30 impression. Your question focuses on pricing.

In most cases, :15's are priced at 50% of 30's, but there are instances where 65 or 75% is used.

In radio, :60 is the standard, with :30's typically priced at 80-85% and :15's not in use. Some stations today, especially top rockers with a sensitivity about clutter and inventory sell "units" not differentiating between :60's and :30's in price.

Thursday, November 16, 1995 #1820

Do you have any information on TV advertising? Specifically, during a 30-minute, primetime TV show has there been a change in how many ads are shown. Are ads longer, shorter...


The Media Guru Answers(Thursday, November 16, 1995 ):

To make sense this must be answered in relation to a period of time. Over the years, commercials have become shorter, from mostly :60's to mostly :30's to a large percentage of :15's, a trend which reversed somewhat recently. Commercial loads in various dayparts have also changed, mostly upaward, over long history. AdAge and other trade publications available at most libraries frequently report trends in commercial length and numbers.




About AMIC

     North America
     Asia / Pacific
     Hong Kong
     The Netherlands
     United Kingdom
     South Africa

Media Guru
Ad Info
Ad Jobs
Ad News
Site & Ad Info
Industry Sites
Copyright © 1996 - 2012 Telmar Group Inc.; all rights reserved
Reuse of the contents of this site without the express written permission of the Telmar Group is strictly prohibited