Re: Comparing traditional advertising and online ads

From: Shalabh Pandey <shalabh_at_mediaturf.com>
Date: Wed 28 Aug 2002 16:33:35 -0500

In terms of comparisions, there are quite a few studies done on this
topic.

Even without going ahead with the (now) hackneyed part of Online is more
optimizable, trackable and immediate, here are some studies that might
show that even in terms of the Branding/purchase intent etc, Online
Advertising is more or less equally effective.

The immediate one that comes to mind is a Harris Interactive study that
measures TV and Online Media on three paramaters and three product
Categories:

Beer (Miller Lite)
Auto (Ford)
Cellular Phones (i2000 plus- Nextel)

Parameter Wise findings:

A) Brand Recall (Online %:TV%):

    -Cellphone: Same (90:90)
    -Car: TV slightly more (77:94)
    -Beer: (86:88)

Brand Recall is equally good!!

B) Positive Intent to try

    -Cellphone:(20:18)
    -Car: (31:44)
    -Beer (31:33)

Positive intent to try is more or less equal- when u advertise on the
Internet- Probably because of the respect for nature of the medium-
technolgy, new, and very literate users?


C) Positive Intent to purchase:

    -Cellphone: (17:14)
    -Car:(23:25)
    -Beer: (10:15)

Ditto!!

Also, another study that comes to mind is an MSN Advantage study (If
somebody wants it- please send a mail to me - and say pleeeease:) )

Also, one compared the RoI that an advertiser would get while
advertising on all medium. I'll share that with you here (primarily an
India centric study- but should hold good everywhere):

To sell Hyundai Accents on TV, the advertiser needs to pay Rs 2/- (4
cents) per exposure on AXN and Rs 22/- (44 cents) per exposure on BBC!!
(Opportunity To See)

Compare that with an online ad: with an average CPM of Rs 200 ($4 CPM).
Thats less than half a cent per exposure!!

I guess both of these studies should be looked at together- Online ads
are equally effective (on somewhat intangible parameters also- aprt from
being much ahead on the tangible deliveries) and that the Cost per
Exposure is wayyy less.

Also, having said this, I would advice not to sell the Internet as a
"reach medium"- the reach is still very very less and that is true for
whichever country as compared. The cost per exposure and lead can be
very less- IF USED IN THE RIGHT WAY.

And remember I am telling all this in the offline advertising metrics- I
have not even used a term like Frequency Capping, Optimization, targeted
ad serving, CPCT evealuation, etc. :)

So those of you who are doing a research on the subject- say Thanks! for
the Gyan (girls can say I love you) and ask for more.

Regards
Shalabh

Shalabh Pandey
Consultant-Media Planning
Mediaturf Worldwide
shalabh_at_mediaturf.com





Received on Wed Aug 28 2002 - 16:33:35 CDT