Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Basics of media planning

2,263 views

Published on

Discussion at the Ukrainian National Academy of Public Administration in Kharkov, Dec. 2012.

  • Be the first to comment

Basics of media planning

  1. 1. The Basics of Media Planning
  2. 2. A traditional view
  3. 3. Marketing strategy MediaFeedback planner / buyer Mass media Consumer vehicle Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  4. 4. Approximate Ad Expenditure in Major Media (% of Total) 19 231 Newspapers TV 8 Direct response 7 Radio 23 Magazines 19 Outdoor Other Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  5. 5. Approximate Ad Expenditure in Major Media (% of Total) 1 10 23 Newspapers 17 TV Direct response Radio7 17 Magazines 6 Social 18 Outdoor Other Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  6. 6.  Pros:  Exposure to adult audience with disposable income  (Somewhat) flexible format  Convenience for the reader Cons:  High ad/content ratio  Growing competition  Falling circulation  Rising ad costs Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  7. 7.  Pros:  Flexible format  Cost efficient  Offers prestige Cons:  Message is perishable  Growing fragmentation of audience  Ad clutter Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  8. 8.  Pros:  Selective targeting  Mobile  Low production costs = market immediacy Cons:  Lack of visual impact  Low average audience Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  9. 9.  Pros:  (Even more) selective targeting  Instant feedback  Accountability Cons:  Prospect database management problem  Image problem  Rising costs Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  10. 10.  Pros:  Audience targeting  Long “shelf life”  Prestige  Flexible format Cons:  Long production cycle  Declining audience  Rising costs Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  11. 11.  Pros:  Can reach most of the market  Low cost per exposure Cons:  Image problem  Low accountability  Regulation Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  12. 12.  The purpose is to design the best plan for delivering ads to prospective purchasers of my product, service, or brand. Which markets? How many prospects? Which medium / vehicles? Reach and frequency of exposure? Budget?
  13. 13. Effectiveness, efficiency, accountability Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  14. 14.  Narrowcast (mass customization)  Demographic  Psychographic  Geographic  Based on usage patterns Take advantage of tracking capabilities  From “captive audience” at live events to “captive users” in computer-mediated transactions Think messages not media Can you combine advertising and selling? Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  15. 15.  Best practices Worst practices Avoiding advertising clutter Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  16. 16.  Effectiveness of message delivery vs. efficiency of audience delivery Predispositions of the audience Qualitative environment of the message Synergistic effect Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  17. 17.  Reach: the total audience covered by a wave of advertising Frequency: a number of times a prospect is exposed to an advertisement during a given period of time Continuity: a length of time an ad runs Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  18. 18. Reach Maximize Frequency Reach smallreach, sacrifice Continuing Continuity number of frequency to campaign to prospects asexpose level of reach selected many time as prospects prospects possible many times during a blitz campaign Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  19. 19. Mounting challenges to traditional view Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  20. 20. Rising costs of exposureFragmentation Diversification of audience of media Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  21. 21. The convergence •Choice is changing the fundamental •Timeliness relationship •Convenience amongmedia, audiences •Qualityand advertisers: •Control/interactivity Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  22. 22.  … will be individualistic, personalized, intimate, playful, specific, interactive. Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  23. 23. Mounting challenges to traditional view Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  24. 24. Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  25. 25.  What does the public thinks of the X initiative? How to increase constituency satisfaction? How to increase constituency engagement? What are the priorities (share of mind) of the constituency? Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  26. 26.  Monitor mentions Monitor conversations Monitor competitive mentions / conversations Identification of prospects Positioning Engagement / feedback Placement Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  27. 27.  Cost per thousand (CPM)  Circulation CPM ad cos t 1000 circulatio n  Market CPM ad cos t 1000 market The goal is to keep waste exposure at a minimum Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  28. 28.  Click through rate Average time of exposure Repeat visitor rate Convergence rate The goal is to keep waste exposure at a minimum Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  29. 29.  Unique blog visitors (Google analytics) Followers, friends Likes, retweets Combined influence Social influence score (Klout, PeakYou, etc.) Convergence rate The goal is to maximize conversation leading to convergence Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  30. 30.  Web Ad.vantage http://www.webadvantage.net/internet- marketing-services/online-media-buying- planning Facebook Social Ads http://www.facebook.com/advertising/ AppSavvy http://www.appssavvy.com/ Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  31. 31. Blog ProfileTwitter onaccount LinkedIn Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  32. 32. Q?Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G
  33. 33. Twitter.comLinkedin.com Alex Gorelik, Ph. D. | Tweet me: @Doc_G

×