Talladega Nights - The Ballad of Ricky Bobby - was initially presented to me (I was exposed to it) as a movie trailer when I went to see Clicked with my son a month ago. I saw the movie trailer again when I went to see Superman Returns two weeks ago. I thought nothing much of the movie then.
But I also happened to be riding an express buss into Manhattan about 10 days ago and saw an outdoor sign off the East River Drive in lower Manhattan that had a poster of Talladega Nights. I also saw a banner for Talladega Nights several times while i looked at my SiteMeter traffic logs for Webmetricsguru.com.
Now, here’s a classic example, in my opinion, of Multichannel Marketing - I see the trailer twice and are exposed to the movie - but otherwise unaffected. Then I see a billboard sign several days later and become aware of the movie. I also see the banner ad on my laptop several times - and now I may actually see the movie simply as an example of the effect of Multi Channel Marketing.
Multi Channel Marketing uses the idea of reach, frequency and retention - it’s a different vocabulary than Paid or Search Advertising uses - yet the two are merging and my work for big corporations (which I can’t go into here) does involve trying to measure the brand lift, the effect of exposure in one media that carries over to another.
Let’s say we had to give some credit to each part of the multichannel marketing effort - but which of the advertising did I see should I credit for being aware of Talladega Nights?
Would it be right to do this way?
- Movie Trailer for Talladega Nights = 33%
Somehow, this does not seem quite right, yet the Movie Trailer, by itself, would not have convinced me to go to the movie (strange). It took the interaction of all three media touch points to convince me that i might want to see Talladega Nights - or even to be aware of the movie.
Also the timing needs to be considered - first exposure - about a month ago - second exposure - about 10 days later - third exposure (billboard sign) about 3 days after that - constant exposure - over the last week - Banner Advertising.
You can’t say Banner Advertising is not effective - it is effective - if it’s used in conjunction with Movie Trailer Advertising (in this case) and OutDoor Advertising. We’re coming into an new aspect of marketing where we need to measure the effectiveness of all the channels we market across -as they affect, perhaps amplify each other.
What I think we need, in Internet Marketing Metrics - the the optimal number of exposures to each type of advertising and a way to connect them all together so we can produce the formulas for each promotion. I have been telling my clients to map out their channels more clearly before they even begin a campaign - as analytics itself, is incapable of sorting this all out if you don’t do the much of the planning ahead of time.
I also had an interesting conversation about this with Paul Knag at the NYC Podcasting Meetup the other night.
As online marketers and web analysts we have the brain power to figure this one out - let’s put on the thinking cap and try to figure out, for the Talladega Nights - The Ballad of Ricky Bobby case what the distribution of credit should go for convincing me to see the movie.
Also, I want to point out that any single ad, by itself, might not be effective. Had I seen only the online banner - I would not have been interested in the movie. Had I seen the Outdoor advertising sign - I probably would not have been interested in the movie either. It’s only the interaction of all three that made me want to go the movie. Hollywood ….are you listening?
\
Current Subscribers
