Last year ITV announced that they were launching addressable TV in a bid to compete with Google and Facebook and take some of their ad revenue. The objective itself was very ambitious and was a bold move to make their advertising more targeted and add value to their customers. It surprised me that with smart tv’s having been around for so long, that it had taken broadcasters this long to make the change.
Brand’s today want to know that they are reaching the right audiences and then they want to see this broken down into specific results. An interesting advancement in technology I recently saw, within the world of offline advertising is bidooh, a digital advertising platform for outdoor digital screens. Their innovative tech can measure exactly how many ‘impressions’ an advert has had and even the demographics of the people that are seeing the ads. A complete game changer in my opinion.
Digital ad spend is winning
As an agency, Tunafish currently offers two services, social media marketing and content, with our marketing strategy built around paid advertisements. This form of advertising is very cost effective, targeted and when done to a good standard and with the right strategy, delivers incredible results, that can be fully measured and monitored.
More and more businesses are spending large portions of their marketing spend on Social Media, but how does it stand up against TV advertising?
In 2017, according to a report by Magna, Digital ad spending reached $209 billion worldwide, 41 percent of the market, while TV brought in $178 billion, 35 percent of the market. This makes 2017 the first year that advertisers spent more on digital than TV, and we can expect the gap to become much wider over the years until broadcasters can be more competitive. Going back to ITV, The Drum published this article about how the broadcasters have seen a “£81m decline in advertising which was partially offset by improved revenue in other areas such as online”.
Is it cost effective?
An interesting metric to look at when comparing digital to tv advertising is CPM, which stands for costs per impressions and measures how much it costs to reach 1000 people. According to research, broadcast TV was $28, while social media was $2.50. The difference is incredible when you consider that with a Facebook ad, not only can you tailor the advert to reach specific demographics of your target audience, but you can also track those people with their pixels and retarget them with further ads. You can now even double across Instagram for no extra charge. For the purpose of sticking to the subject, I won’t take into account their recent data troubles. Other interesting comparisons are radio at $10 and direct mail at $57.
There are also some notable differences between the social media platforms. Facebook’s CPM is $1.54, whereas Twitter is $12.16, and Linkedin is $27.90. Despite the differences in cost, all channels should always be considered as part of a marketing strategy, as each platform offers different opportunities and differences in audiences.
Other things to consider
There are of course other factors to take into consideration. On social media, you are fighting to be seen amongst a lot of noise and avid scrollers, so great content is a must. With TV adverts, you are one single ad on a large screen. On the other hand, are the right people seeing these ads and who is actually watching them? I can’t remember the last time I saw an advert on TV that was a product I was interested in. The last time I reacted to any form of advertising on TV was when I saw an advertising board for holidays Abu Dhabi during the Manchester derby. It would be interesting to know what spike in web traffic Etihad Holidays had during the game.
It will be interesting to see how marketing spends change in 2018, as brands no doubt gain more and more trust in social media and move their budgets online.
You can read more on marketing trends in 2018 in our white paper, here.