Hasta La Creative!

When the recession hit America with a huge thud, big business began to reconsider its residual income and closed up the budgets. Of course this hurt advertising agencies in a big way and many experts thought they would never recover, but this article from AdAge seems to contradict the naysayers once and for all.

Total spending among the 100 Leading National Advertisers (LNA) reached a record $108.6 billion in 2013, passing the previous spending peak set in pre-recession 2007.

Quick, call your clients…

(more…)

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

The recession has either changed the way advertisers do business or has forced us to reevaluate the ways in which we do business. The focus has shifted to the effectiveness and efficiency of an ad campaign rather than stressing the  campaign or ad variables such as reach and effective frequency.

If you work in a media department, then measuring effectiveness and efficiency is something you’ve likely done for years with little to no fanfare from the client side. Well, the climate’s changed, and clients are concerned more than ever — with good reason — that their ads and campaigns meet efficient, effective, and measurable goals. Their priority is to connect with the target audience in a manner that’s more in-tune with a reduced budget. Clients are are requiring or searching for agencies capable of providing campaigns that work harder and smarter.

In addition, advertisers (namely P&G and Coca Cola), have instituted Value Based Compensation (VBC)  arrangements made up of a pay-for-performance (P4P) layout that can be attained in addition to a base fee.

The Nielsen Company has just announced that a new software product, Rapid Campaign Evaluation (RCE), a fast and inexpensive means to review ad performance in just over a week. Due to the costs incurred when an ad or campaign is launched, RCE will give agencies information quickly so as to allow them to respond in an appropriate manner.

Richard Reeves, associate director of Consumer Research Services at the Nielsen Company, notes an agency not only will have the ability to evaluate their own endeavors but the ability to evaluate their competitor’s as well.

“Whenever a new commercial is executed,” Reeves says, “there is always that element of anticipation about how it will perform in the ‘real world.’ If it’s a competitor’s ad — you are usually left worrying about the damage it will do to your brand.”

RCE was designed and tested in Australia to measure the strength (or weakness) of TV spots. How many people saw or heard the ads or whether the audience was able to determine the advertiser and the take-away message will provide advertisers with almost “real-time” data they can then use to readjust their tactics such as:

• An ad that performed strongly may provide justification to increase spend.
• An ad with mediocre results could be re-edited to clarify the brand message and increase brand cues, or it could be taken back into qualitative research for fine tuning.
• An ad can be created or ad spend can be increased if RCE showed strong effectiveness measures for a competitor’s ad.

In just over a week, agencies will be able to view data in order to evaluate effectiveness or lack thereof, ensuring clients get the biggest bang for their buck.

While advertising “gurus” have bandied back and forth as to the fairness or plausibility of the VBC model, companies, such as Coca Cola, have already put it into action. In truth, it’s the most equitable payment arrangement; agencies require media vendors to prove their performance. Why shouldn’t clients require the same from their agencies?

Nielsen’s new software is just another step in the ongoing evolution of the industry.

Jeff Louis has over ten years of brand-building, media strategy, and new business experience. His passion is writing, while his strong suit seems to be sarcasm.  You can follow Jeff on Twitter or become a fan on Examiner.com.

AdWeek and Harris recently released a poll asking those not involved in the advertising trade what they thought of advertising’s “relevancy.”

The results show that most find that our jobs, as a whole, are rather irrelevant.

Advertising’s down, no doubt, and now Adweek’s heaping salt on the wound!

Well, Mr. and Mrs. America, let’s look at a life without advertising. A life of relevance.

First of all, without advertising, we would not have free access to television. Advertisers in essence pay for the shows we watch by running commercials. By the same logic, the web in that state would not be as comprehensive as the one we experience now. Radio would be a paid service with subscribers. Programs and shows with relatively lower ratings would be immediately slashed since they would no longer be able to support themselves.

The cultural art form of advertising would be lost.  The circle of life would be disrupted.  Just as life influences advertising, ads influence culture.

Without advertising, creatives would be cubicle-bound and non-imaginative. Serious. Boring. Sex would not sell, and neither would honesty. No one would fight for the cause. PETA would consist of two guys fighting for animal rights, and no one would care. Animals wouldn’t be cool to wear. Or not wear. Or own.  Times Square would be dimly lit. Your favorite beer would be just “BEER,” as the term ‘generic’ would dominate store shelves. Color would be sparse. Trendsetters would be trend-less. No brands, no logos, no icons or spokespeople. No sexy models, sexy shows, or suggestive commercials. We wouldn’t know who to vote for, or why. Four hour erections? Who’d need the pills, let alone use them? No body-image, no silicone implants, no tummy-tucks. No Jon & Kate. Michael Jackson would just be another singer. No Hollywood trailers, stars, starlets, tramps, red carpets, or blockbuster openings. No E! TV, no TMZ. No Paris, Lindsay, Nicole, or reality TV. No Tila Tequila.

No PSA’s warning that your brain on drugs was scrambled. Or that kids shouldn’t smoke crack and that crack kills. Rather than axing the marketing budget first, corporations would axe employees. And that would be just fine, because there would be no PR effort, no big news story, therefore no downside.

Life would go on, but it would be bland and tasteless. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and MySpace: no need for them.

Take a picture of the Cold War-era Russia and apply it to a life without advertising. Cold. Drizzling. Muddled.

The link to this study is now unavailable.  Was the issue so unimportant that Adweek pulled the article? Or was the study published on the wrong day?

Luckily, I printed it:

In an AdweekMedia/Harris Poll last month, respondents were given a chance to say they don’t feel strongly about the industry one way or another, and nearly half of them took it. Asked to characterize their overall impression of “the advertising industry in general,” 47 percent said it’s “neither negative nor positive.” Predictably, those with a negative view of the business (9 percent “very,” 28 percent “somewhat”) outnumbered those with a positive view (2 percent “very,” 15 percent “somewhat”). (The total exceeds 100 percent due to rounding.)

If such numbers count as not-so-bad news for the ad business, responses were less positive on the question of whether consumers find advertising relevant to their lives (”By relevant,” Harris told respondents, “we mean how it connects to things that are ongoing in your daily life”). Given the effort put into aiming the right ad at the right target, the numbers here were pretty lackluster. Eight percent of respondents said advertising is “very relevant” to their lives, and 42 percent said it’s “somewhat relevant.” Thirty-two percent termed it “not that relevant” and 14 percent “not at all relevant,” with the rest unsure.

Can you say “OUCH!”?

Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Account Coordinator. His passion is writing. Reach out and touch him: www.linkedin.com or www.twitter.com.

There are some pretty unbelievable resources available online at no cost. Everything from whitepapers to completed slide shows, covering any topic imaginable. Some of the better ones are put out by professional groups in support of advertising agencies and efforts. These include the Advertising Media Internet Center (AMIC), the 4A’s, and the Outdoor Advertising Association of America.These organizations also fund and run many of the Public Service Announcements.

On May 5th, the OAAA’s public service campaign was a shot in the arm to all worrying where the next paycheck will be coming from, or if there is a next paycheck. Named Recession 101, the billboard campaign is simple, as if printed on a piece of notebook paper and tacked to a 14′ x 48′ out on the highway. The messaging consists of a simple reminder: some day, the recession will end.

It is not the greatest, most creative campaign ever done, but it is timely and truthful. Look on it as a shot in the arm to keep away all of the bad stuff coming from television. The great driving force behind it is the idea of looking up during adversity rather than down. Moving forward instead of complaining. In an apt message, the OAAA states:

The campaign is about America and resiliency. The recession has hurt one of America’s greatest attributes-it’s unshakeable optimism…Recession 101 isn’t selling anything other than the American Spirit.”

And it’s about time we returned to the American spirit and optimism. The entire campaign is available here.

Jeff Louis: Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Coordinator. His passion is writing, contributing to BMA as well as freelancing. He’d love to hear from you, so leave a comment or follow the links: linkedin.com or twitter.com.

Have you ever diligently searched for some information, or at least several sources, and come up empty handed? Happens to me all the time…I’ll get a “great” idea and try to substantiate it, only to find that there is no accessible data. It is frustrating and a bit degrading. Recently, I wanted some hard numbers on the state of the Ad Industry, and wasn’t coming up with much besides geusstimates and hype: I wanted data on damage done to date; total layoffs, shops that closed, account spending cuts, etc.

Enter AdWeek. Usually a good source; not one that I would consider as a supplier of inane (lacking sense, significance, void) information. AdWeek usually does a decent job covering the industry, and when I saw a piece done by Mark Dolliver, “How Will Downturn Impact Advertising?” I almost peed in my pants. Finally! I excitedly dug in, expecting some hard-hitting insights from a professional publication and journalist that would leave me much better for reading it.

Wrong! Basically, the article is an opinion-based couple of paragraphs derived from a survey completed by approximately 4500 LinkedIn users. The headline is catchy, and Mr. Dolliver’s hook is that “If the Recession doesn’t kill advertising, it could make it stronger.” There were no answers, just opinion. No data, just speculation. No scientific study…just a poll that is sketchy with vague answer choices …one being, “Less Advertising.”

What in the hell does “less advertising” mean? Less revenue? Physically fewer ads? With spot costs declining, couldn’t we have more advertising? If we’re basing “less” on volume, the rapid unraveling of the print industry would definitely mean “less advertising.”

Stay tuned…as soon as the hard facts come in, I’ll get back to you.

Jeff Louis is a Strategic Media Planner, Project Manager, and New Business Coordinator. His passion is writing, contributing to BMA as well as freelancing.
He’d love to hear from you: www.linkedin.com/in/jefflouis or on twitter @jlo0312.

Ask anyone today what topic or area of concern could possibly be a hot commodity and you will surely get job vacancies as one of them. While we all know of the governing recession and layoffs happening in the world today, it remains that it is also an opportunity to trick people out of their leftover money. Pathetic as it may seem, it just remains that people are desperate to have some form of livelihood for their end, caring less of other’s welfare.

“There’s always people out there willing to take advantage of people’s misery,” said Chris Thetford, director of communications for the Better Business Bureau of Eastern Missouri and Southern Illinois. “I’ve never met anyone who had to pay to get a legitimate job.”

Nationally, authorities are finding examples of job scammers and taking action. For example, the Federal Trade Commission filed a federal court complaint in November against a Georgia firm that was charging $120 to $140 for materials it claimed would help applicants pass a U.S. Postal Service qualifying exam.

(Source) The Sun News

This post summarises an article from the Financial Review Jan 09 in which 34 Australian CEO’s are interviewed regarding their approach to the trying economic and business conditions ahead.

This is bound to be a wake up call for people who believe that Microsoft is the last company to be hit by the economic turmoil befalling us today. It has been announced that Bill Gates and company will be laying off a large chunk of their staff in various regions by 15,000 workers in light of the hard times we are in.

Now this may be a cause for alarm for most people today. Who would ever thought that Microsoft would join the fray of cutting cost by releasing most of their employees today.

According to Fudzilla, web chitter chatter to this affect is now “no longer a rumour but a fact” and it would see Microsoft’s 90,000 global workforce trimmed by approximately 15,000 jobs come 15 January. As to which countries or departments will be hit worst that remains up in the air but it is said EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa) and MSN could be hit hardest by the redundancies.

The economic problem is getting worse folks. Let us try to keep our heads in check and start thinking of ways to survive!

(Source) Fudzilla