With the Super Bowl approaching on Sunday, I thought it would be
interesting to compare traditional TV advertising via the Super Bowl with
digital marketing outlets. First, a big
benefit of airing a TV ad during the Super Bowl is viewership. A Super Bowl ad is likely to be watched by an
estimated 114mm viewers whereas a YouTube video (by my quick math) may be
viewed by 26mm unique users a day. About
a 4x difference in a short amount of time!
Second, the cost for a Super Bowl ad is significantly more
expensive. This year, a Super Bowl ad is
expected to cost a marketer up to $5mm for a 30 second time slot whereas a
YouTube ad campaign will cost $500K per day.
That is about $30,000x more expensive per second for a Super Bowl
ad than a YouTube ad. A third comparison
is the difference in lifetime brand awareness.
Super Bowl ads are known to stick to consumers for years and capture
audience attention "in the moment". Digital advertising also
attempts to capture consumer's attention "in the moment" through targeted
ads, however according to some research, this may not be as cost-effective since
targeted ads may need to be customized according to the different digital
advertising platforms.
Super Bowl TV advertising looks to be a more effective approach compared
to digital marketing. However, according
to Ad Executives, the best approach is to pair the two together. One executive reconsidered going solely
digital and decided to run Super Bowl ads as well to generate large-scale
awareness and greater buzz. Another company’s
online sales increased 50% compared to sales before the Super Bowl. Using
a multi-channel marketing approach by paying for a 30 second commercial spot during
the Super Bowl and simultaneously advertising on Facebook, Instagram, and
YouTube may be the best way to increase brand awareness and buzz…just expect to
pay at least $20mm.
No comments:
Post a Comment