Thursday, February 04, 2016

Super Bowl vs. Digital Marketing-- Is there a Winner?

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: