Radio auditing Most Common inefficiency in Planning and Buying Radio Fine Tuning Radio Planning and Buying: 5 guidelines

1. How auditing radio campaigns helps
improve planning and buying efficiency
Paola FurlanettoPaola Furlanetto
Managing Director & Founding PartnerManaging Director & Founding Partner
A+ Advertising AuditA+ Advertising Audit
Copyright A+Copyright A+ Ad AuditAd Audit 20072007

2. Contents
1. Introduction
Media Auditing in a snapshot
The Italian Scenario
2. The Importance of building and maintaining Pools for radio auditing.
3. Planning and Buying Radio: Most common Inefficiencies
4. Fine tuning Radio Planning and buying : 5 guidelines
5. Auditing the future: key trend

3. Media Auditing in a Snapshot

4. Media Auditing in Brief
What is it
A systematic, constant control activity
of media costs & communication results
Goal
Assess (the most) relevant part of company
communication expenditures
Peculiarity
Conducted by third party Institutes,
having specific know how in the media planning business
When it is done
ex-post (at the end of FY or every quarter/six months)

5. Stock Exchange listings require cost item analyses
Multinationals need to exercise control/authority
over regional offices
Factors that have contributed to its development
Propensity, typically Anglo-Saxon, to measure1. Cultural
2. Formal
3. Management

6. Today in Italy
Media Auditing is a fast growing market.
Key perceived benefits are:
1. Knowledge
“ I want to check my own performance
supported by an objective, third party institute”
2 Formal Assessment
“ I want to be certified for a job done properly”
3. Anticipate the future
“ I want to be proactive and anticipate requests that will sooner or
later come from procurement / my boss”

7. Radio Auditing

8. Radio Auditing as it is
Not common
Mainly based on cost checks
forgetting that, for the same price, radio advertisements
of different performance / effectiveness may be bought.

9. In line with other media,
take into consideration:
Radio Auditing as we believe it should be
Cost and Quality

10. Company Compared toCompared to
Pool’s
Average
How Auditing Works
Pool = All radio campaigns
addressed towards the same target
Not as expectation
but in reality

11. Methodology
The comparison is carried out on the basis of parameters:
- frequently used in media planning/buying
- consolidated in international auditing methodologies

12. Qualitative Parameters (Media Planning)
1. Effective Reach
Percentage of people -in target- reached a minimum number of times
(e.g. 3, 6,)
2. Position in break
Percentage of pressure in qualitative positions
(e.g. first position in break or stand-alone position)
3. Affinity
Concentration of target audience among overall contacts
4. Peak Time
Share of advertising pressure developed by the highest audience
time bands
(time bands definitions varies according to target: late morning HWS,
afternoon teens, drive time for adults ..etc)

13. Cost Parameter (Media Buying)
5. Net CPP
Cost of a unit of advertising pressure (Campaign cost/GRP)

14. Radio: The Italian Scenario

15. Radio in Numbers
BroadcastingBroadcasting
More than 1.100 stations
650 of them are represented by an association
218 Monitored by Audiradio,
18 with Nielsen data on advertising campaigns (6am to 12pm).
InvestmentsInvestments
5% of Advertising expenditure
Very much influenced by TV overbooking
SurveySurvey
Audiradio: Consistent, reliable

16. Audiradio Survey in Brief

17. 2 Issues

18. “Frequency confusion”
Stations broadcast on more than one frequency
and change frequencies according to the area.
-> Same frequency, many broadcasters.

19. “Lack of transparency”
An official Census
of Broadcasters and Frequencies
does not exist

20. Feasibility National and Local Auditing
National stations
Syndications/Commercial
packages
Local stations
CNR: N.1 station monitored
(Gamma Radio MI)
Nr.1 station (Lattemiele)
included in CNR,
thus not monitored
B) Commercial
Position
Inside the Break
D) Effective Reach
E) Share of
Pressure (GRP)
in peak time
# Stations
with all info
(a,b,c,d,e)
#13 stations:
RAI1,2,3 - RTL -105 -RDS -
RISMI-DJ -RMC-KK-101-
CAPITAL -24 - m2o
Not available
(round table with Nielsen /
Sales House professionals
would be suitable)
LatteMIele, Gamma station,
RItalia anni 60 MI.
Others: Commercial emission
monitoring needed
Available for all the stations surveyed by Audiradio
Available for all the stations surveyed by Audiradio
Source: Nielsen (Adex Survey)
A) Commercial
Emission
Monitoring
Nr.15 stations:
RAI1,2,3 - RTL -105 -RDS -
RISMI-DJ -RMC-KK-101-CAPITAL-
24-PLAY-m2o (RISMI/KK
included in Italia5, KK included
in Radio5, thus not "tracked" by
Nielsen)
Italia 5: Nr.1 station monitored (station Italia Anni 60 MI)
Available for all the stations monitored by Nielsen
Source: Audiradio
C) GRP (Pressure)
on target
Nr. 13 stations:
(no Play station, no Italia 5)
CNR: all (38 + 2 multireg:LatteMilele e Cuore)
Italia 5: Rismi and KK (national), all the local stations: Subasio, Zeta,
KK, Company, Bruno, Norba +multireg RItalia anni 60

21. 2. Building and maintaining
a balanced cost and quality pool

22. Company Compared toCompared to
Pool’s
Average
How Auditing Works
Pool = All campaigns on air
addressed to the same target
Not as expectation
but in reality

23. Building Pools: 3 phases
1. Interviews Market Professionals
2. Software Run and Mechanic attribution
3. Manual check

24. Building Pools: Phase 1) Interviews
ObjectiveObjective
Define key radio planning targets
Estimate their share on overall radio expenditures
InterviewsInterviews
To media agencies, sales houses , software houses
ResultsResults
6 Broad Targets

25. ObjectiveObjective
Set up 6 target pools.
Attribute flights to their proper target
ProcessProcess
1. Establish Average Radio Affinity Index per target
2. Define thresholds for “Adults” attribution
3. Attributes remaining flights to their pool
ResultsResults
Pool entity to be fine tuned.
Building Pools: Phase 2) Mechanics

26. Building Pools: Phase 3) Manual Check
ObjectiveObjective
Overall Consistency (coherence between phase 1 and 2)
ProcessProcess
1. Manual Check of 5.524 flights (in 2006), if doubts arise
-> either the evaluation committee agreed on the attribution
-> or they were rejected (less than 0,6% of total radio flights).
2. In order to attribute a correct number of flights to Adult +18 pool
- which is a quite common target (interviews point out 20-25%)-
the affinity threshold shifted from 103 to 115
3. In case of 2 different target options available
flights were attributes to their elective target
(e.g detergent to HW, make up to women etc.)
ResultsResults
Procedure in line with both experts expectations and methodology
requirements

27. Pools Aged Share Flight Share GRP
(+11yo)
Adults +18 23% 42%
Young and Young Adults 11-34 28% 26%
Housewives +18 11% 12%
Men all 4% 5%
Women all 12% 7%
Entrepreneurs,
Managers etc
All 23% 9%
Base Total
5.524
Total
656.176
2006 Pools

28. Trend 06 vs 05 (comparable data)
Pools 2005 2006 Trend
Adults
+11yo
Flight
Grp Adults+11
Grp TG
21%
41%
20%
39% -
Young &
Young Adults
Flight
Grp Adults+11
Grp TG
28%
28%
37%
30%
30%
39%
+
Housewives Flight
Grp Adults+11
Grp TG
16%
14%
17%
12%
13%
16%
-
Men Flight
Grp Ind
Grp TG
4%
6%
4%
5% =
Women Flight
Grp Ind
Grp TG
10%
5%
6%
11%
5%
7%
+
Entrepreneurs
Managers etc.
Flight
Grp Ind
Grp TG
21%
7%
10%
23%
7%
11%
+

29. Why are Pools so important?
They compare similar realitiescompare similar realities
(target A flight is compared with all campaigns aimed at target A)
They provide info on what has been feasible, on averageprovide info on what has been feasible, on average.
-> feasibility
(instead of media potential, real market feasibility)
-> average
(we’re not talking about best in class,
in brief you don’t need extra skill to do it)

30. Market analysis with and w/o a pool

31. N et w eighted C PG - flights 20-900 grp's - target 11-34
0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1.0 0 0
1.2 0 0
1.4 0 0
1.6 0 0
1.8 0 0
2 .0 0 0
0 10 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0
G rps
CpG
How auditing improves buying: comparing CPP
Sources
Audiradio, Nielsen AdEx
Software: Soglie Media Soft
ad hoc release for A+
For confidentiality reasons the
exemple on discount
Is based on Nielsen net data
(estimate) and do not take into
consideration A+ info on real
market price.
All FlightsAll Flights (20(20--900grps)900grps) 3.5113.511
Average Cpp
515,8
Average Cpp
515,8

32. N et w eig h ted C p g - flig h ts 2 0 -9 0 0 g rp 's - P O O L 1 1 -3 4
0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 .0 0 0
1 .2 0 0
1 .4 0 0
1 .6 0 0
1 .8 0 0
2 .0 0 0
0 1 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0
G rp s
C p g
N et w eighted C PG - flights 20-900 grp's - target 11-34
0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1.0 0 0
1.2 0 0
1.4 0 0
1.6 0 0
1.8 0 0
2 .0 0 0
0 10 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0
G rps
CpG
How auditing improves buying: comparing CPP
Average Cpp
515,8
Average Cpp
515,8
Average Cpp
387,8
Average Cpp
387,8
Sources
Audiradio, Nielsen AdEx
Software: Soglie Media Soft
ad hoc release for A+
For confidentiality reasons the
exemple on discount
Is based on Nielsen net data
(estimate) and do not take into
consideration A+ info on real
market price.
All Flights: 3.511All Flights: 3.511
Pool 11-34yo Flights: 1.253Pool 11Pool 11--34yo Flights: 1.25334yo Flights: 1.253
CPP are index.
A+ pool costs
kept confidential

33. Affinity Index on Target 11-34 yo
N et w eig h ted C p g - flig h ts> 2 0 g rp 's - Ta rg et 1 1 -3 4
0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 .0 0 0
1 .2 0 0
1 .4 0 0
1 .6 0 0
1 .8 0 0
2 .0 0 0
2 .2 0 0
2 .4 0 0
2 .6 0 0
2 .8 0 0
3 .0 0 0
3 .2 0 0
3 .4 0 0
3 .6 0 0
3 .8 0 0
4 .0 0 0
0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 4 0 1 5 0 1 6 0 1 7 0 1 8 0 1 9 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 2 2 0 2 3 0
A ffinity
C pg
Net w eighted Cpg - flights>20 grp's - PO O L 11-34
0
200
400
600
800
1.000
1.200
1.400
1.600
1.800
2.000
2.200
2.400
2.600
2.800
3.000
3.200
3.400
3.600
3.800
4.000
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230
Affinity
Cpg
All Flights: 3.511All Flights: 3.511
Pool 11-34yo Flights: 1.253Pool 11Pool 11--34yo Flights: 1.25334yo Flights: 1.253
3030 220220
140140 220220
Sources
Audiradio, Nielsen AdEx
Software: Soglie Media Soft
ad hoc release for A+
For confidentiality reasons the
exemple on discount
Is based on Nielsen net data
(estimate) and do not take into
consideration A+ info on real
market price.
800800
200200
4.0004.000
200200
Affinity
CPP

34. How many GRPs do we need to get 60% Reach 3+?
Target and Pool: Adults +11
Target and Pool: 11-34 yo

35. How many GRPs do we need to get 60% Reach 3+?
Reach 3+ - flights>20 grp's - POOL 11-34
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600
Grp's
Reach +3
Reach 3+ - flights>20 grp's - Target Individuals +11
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600
Grp's
Reach 3+
Target and Pool: Adults +11
Target and Pool: 11-34yo
60%
60%
Adults
700-800 grp to get 60% reach 3+
Adults
700-800 grp to get 60% reach 3+
11-34 yo
500-600 grp to get 60% reach 3+
11-34 yo
500-600 grp to get 60% reach 3+
Target and Pool: 11-34 yo

36. Highlights on 2006 Radio Planning

37. Pools and KPIs
I Pool % First
positiond
& stand
alone
%
prime
time
DT 7-9
N° stations per
40-60% reach
3ots
Adults +18 Grp Ind
Grp TG
20%- 3% 21% Min 7
Average 12
Young
Young Adults
Grp Ind
Grp TG
15%- 2% 12%
11%
Min 2
Average 6
HW Grp Ind
Grp TG
23%- 3% 27%
29%
Min 9
Average 12
Men Grp Ind
Grp TG
22% - 4% 21% Min 6
Average 11
women Grp Ind
Grp TG
14% -3 % 14% Min 11
Average 14
Entrepreneurs,
Managers etc
Grp Ind
Grp TG
18% - 2% 29%
30%
Min 8
Average 5
1. Top positions are mainly used by HW or Male1.1. Top positions are mainly used by HW or MaleTop positions are mainly used by HW or Male

38. I Pool % First
positiond
& stand
alone
%
prime
time
DT 7-9
N° stations per
40-60% reach
3ots
Adults +18 Grp Ind
Grp TG
20%- 3% 21% Min 7
Average 12
Young
Young Adults
Grp Ind
Grp TG
15%- 2% 12%
11%
Min 2
Average 6
HW Grp Ind
Grp TG
23%- 3% 27%
29%
Min 9
Average 12
Men Grp Ind
Grp TG
22% - 4% 21% Min 6
Average 11
women Grp Ind
Grp TG
14% -3 % 14% Min 11
Average 14
Entrepreneurs,
Managers etc
Grp Ind
Grp TG
18% - 2% 29%
30%
Min 8
Average 5
Pools and KPIs
2. Campaigns targeted to Males
have also the highest percentage
of stand-alone positions
2. Campaigns targeted to Males2. Campaigns targeted to Males
have also the highest percentagehave also the highest percentage
of standof stand--alone positionsalone positions

39. I Pool % First
positiond
& stand
alone
%
prime
time
DT 7-9
N° stations per
40-60% reach
3ots
Adults +18 Grp Ind
Grp TG
20%- 3% 21% Min 7
Average 12
Young
Young Adults
Grp Ind
Grp TG
15%- 2% 12%
11%
Min 2
Average 6
HW Grp Ind
Grp TG
23%- 3% 27%
29%
Min 9
Average 12
Men Grp Ind
Grp TG
22% - 4% 21% Min 6
Average 11
women Grp Ind
Grp TG
14% -3 % 14% Min 11
Average 14
Entrepreneurs,
Managers etc
Grp Ind
Grp TG
18% - 2% 29%
30%
Min 8
Average 5
Pools and KPIs3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need
An average of …
- 5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets
3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need
An average ofAn average of ……
-- 5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets

40. I Pool % prime
posizioni
e singole
%
prime
time
DT 7-9
N° emittenti
per
40-60% reach
3-5 ots
Adults +18 Grp Ind
Grp TG
20%- 3% 21% Min 7
Media 12
Young
Young Adults
Grp Ind
Grp TG
15%- 2% 12%
11%
Min 2
Media 6
HW Grp Ind
Grp TG
23%- 3% 27%
29%
Min 9
Media 12
Men Grp Ind
Grp TG
22% - 4% 21% Min 6
Media 11
women Grp Ind
Grp TG
14% -3 % 14% Min 11
Media 14
Entrepreneurs,
Managers etc
Grp Ind
Grp TG
18% - 2% 29%
30%
Min 8
Media 5
Pools and KPIs3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need
An average of …
- 5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets
- 14 stations for the Women target
3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need3. To reach 50%+ of the target at least 3 times, we need
An average ofAn average of ……
-- 5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets5/6 stations for Young and Entrepreneurs targets
-- 14 stations for the Women target14 stations for the Women target

41. IntroductionMost common Inefficiencies in
Radio Planning and Buying

42. 1. No check on commercials
FactFact
There is rarely a check on commercials’ broadcasting
(# of aired commercials, scheduling )
ConsequencesConsequences
Un-successful campaigns improperly attributed to radio inefficiency
while due to partially aired commercials
VarianceVariance
+/- 50% in number of grp

43. 2. Missing Post Analysis
FactFact
Post analysis hardly conducted.
ConsequencesConsequences
GRP may change consistently according to station listening evolution.
VarianceVariance
+/- 25% in number of grp

44. Post Analysis Top 20 flights 1 sem 07
Audience variance vs 1 sem 0 (comparable data)*
Campaign Advertiser
begin of
flight end of flight
Nr.
Spots
Nr.
Radios
Grp's
Audiradio
1 H 07
Grp's
Audiradio
1 H 06 Delta
1 DMC GIORNO E NOTTE PRO. PROD.D. DMC SA ROVERETA F.RSM 20070208 20070630 1372 3 2.365,4 2.154,9 9,8%
2 BLOCKBUSTER PRO. NOLEGG.VCR BLOCKBUSTER ITALIA MILANO 20070108 20070630 5639 14 2.348,8 2.052,6 14,4%
3 ZERO F PROD. ANTIFUMO FUTURA SHOP SRL PADOVA 20070119 20070615 589 1 1.775,8 1.506,4 17,9%
4 EXPERT ELETTR. ANNIV. GA NON AL. EXPERT ITALY SPA MILANO 20070503 20070526 3039 13 1.622,8 1.466,0 10,7%
5 DURACELL CO. PILE GILLETTE DIV.DURACELL MILANO 20070520 20070630 1830 12 1.559,9 1.432,5 8,9%
6 EXPERT ELETTR. PRO. GA NON ALIM. EXPERT ITALY SPA MILANO 20070608 20070623 2693 13 1.426,7 1.288,3 10,7%
7 EXPERT ELETTR. PRO. GA NON ALIM. EXPERT ITALY SPA MILANO 20070108 20070128 2348 11 1.371,3 1.247,3 9,9%
8 GILLETTE FUSION RASOI GILLETTE GROUP IT.SPA MILANO 20070124 20070325 1304 9 1.227,4 1.165,1 5,3%
9 ALFA 147+GT PRO. FIAT DIV.ALFA TORINO 20070408 20070514 2118 8 1.192,7 1.085,2 9,9%
10 GILLETTE FUSION CO.RASOI GILLETTE GROUP IT.SPA MILANO 20070422 20070630 1452 10 1.179,1 1.070,4 10,2%
11 CALIFORNIA 3 PROD.DIMAGR. FUTURA SHOP SRL PADOVA 20070209 20070629 389 1 1.176,2 956,4 23,0%
12 FIAT PRO. FIAT DIV.FIAT AUTO TORINO 20070107 20070120 1466 16 1.175,5 1.089,9 7,9%
13 DISCOTECHE RADIO COMM. DISCOTECHE RADIO COMM. 20070101 20070630 1610 3 1.149,5 1.077,6 6,7%
14 EXPERT ELETTR. PRO. GA NON ALIM. EXPERT ITALY SPA MILANO 20070316 20070331 2188 11 1.138,8 1.023,7 11,2%
15 EXPERT ELETTR. PRO. GA NON ALIM. EXPERT ITALY SPA MILANO 20070216 20070303 2086 11 1.136,3 1.035,7 9,7%
16 AGIP YOU & AGIP PRO. CARTE FED. ENI ROMA 20070311 20070405 2260 16 1.090,8 988,0 10,4%
17 EURIZON VITA PROG.PENS.BIS EURIZON VITA SPA TORINO 20070606 20070626 1338 9 988,4 892,3 10,8%
18 CARREFOUR ANNIV. ALTRI IPER SSC SOC.SVIL.COMM.SRL MILANO 20070423 20070523 1649 13 967,4 863,0 12,1%
19 LEGGO QUOT. ED.LEGGO SPA ROMA 20070324 20070610 1718 4 909,7 801,6 13,5%
20 FIAT PRO. FIAT DIV.FIAT AUTO TORINO 20070218 20070303 1448 16 886,0 822,4 7,7%
2. Missing Post Analysis
*escluding italia 5 and M20 data in 2007
0707
vsvs 0606

45. 3. Cost per Commercial instead of CPP based on GRP
FactFact
Radio deals based on cost per commercial
Consequences:Consequences:
Qualitative Planning not feasible
Overall campaign performance may be at risk
Radio cost efficiency is damaged
VarianceVariance
Contacting the right target may cost 3 times more

46. 3. Cost per Spot instead of CPP based on GRP

47. 4. # planned stations per flight
FactFact
Even robust campaigns (based on at least 10 stations)
plan single flights only on 1-3 stations
in order to:
- increase flight impact
- overcome attention threshold
ConsequencesConsequences
High Impact and responsiveness on small entity sub-target
No evidence of radio effectiveness in tracking studies
Overall target reach at risk

48. Radio Audit 2005: Car Company
Overall Campaign Results
- - - Average + + +
CGRP
Reach
Peak Time
H06-09 + H18-21
Position*
Qualitative idx
To be defined
-22%-22%
-1%-1%
+18%+18%
+8%+8%
Based on 14 Nielsen stations - * first o stand alone positions
Pool : Adullts +18 yo – GRP: Adults +18.

49. - - - Average + + +
Reach
Peak Time
H06-09 + H18-21
Position
Qualitative
idx
To be defined
-17%-17%
+18%+18%
+13%+13%
Based on 14 Nielsen stations - * first o stand alone positions
Pool : Adullts +18 yo – GRP: Adults +18.
Radio Audit 2005: Car Company
Flight # 1 Results

50. - - - Average + + +
Reach
Peak Time
H06-09 + H18-21
Position
Qualitative
idx
To be defined
+19%+19%
+25%+25%
-20%-20%
Based on 14 Nielsen stations - * first o stand alone positions
Pool : Adullts +18 yo – GRP: Adults +18.
Radio Audit 2005: Car Company
Flight # 2 Results

51. - - - Average + + +
Reach
Peak Time
H06-09 + H18-21
Position
Qualitative
idx
To be defined
+2%+2%
+26%+26%
-1%-1%
Based on 14 Nielsen stations - * first o stand alone positions
Pool : Adullts +18 yo – GRP: Adults +18.
Radio Audit 2005: Car Company
Flight # 3 Results

52. 5. Effective reach should be implemented
FactFact
Reach is often 1+, or 3+.
No focused objectives for launch / maintenance campaigns
Consequences:Consequences:
- diminished effectiveness
- overspending

53. 5 Guide5 Guide--LinesLines
To FineTo Fine--Tune Radio PlanningTune Radio Planning

54. 5 Recommendations
1. Always check actual communication results1. Always check actual communication results (post analysis),
in order to maintain the requested effectiveness
2. Be prepared to pay a little extra money to get random checks onget random checks on
commercial airingcommercial airing. Spending time in efficient planning may be useless if
commercials are not transmitted. Benefits are higher than cost
3. Never accept cost per commercialNever accept cost per commercial.
Audience, if not available, should be at least estimated
4. To ensure proper support to company goal,
evaluate communications results for each planned flight.evaluate communications results for each planned flight.
If concentration in few stations still considered suitable, cut by age or
geographical areas and then test results with over-sampled tracking studies
5. Effective reachEffective reach is an important asset that makes the difference between radio
campaigns and other media: enhance the radio power by making customizedmaking customized
reach goals per flightreach goals per flight (e.g.: launch or maintenance, TOM et).
Try to work on corridors in order to optimize expenditure.

55. ..and 3 considerations
Media Auditing take a picture of the reality as it is,
in radio planning and buying we have detected:
1. Consistent discrepancy between knowing and doing:
strong radio expertise in media agencies
not always mirrored in media plans
-> better, easier procedure to be established
-> media planner to be properly instructed
2. Deals often focused on apparent savings:
both :
- checking commercial airing
- basic attention to effectiveness
would improve radio campaign results
and get performance higher than expected.
Media Auditors
may help
Media Auditors
may help
Broadcaster
& Agencies
to be committed
Broadcaster
& Agencies
to be committed

56. ..and 3 considerations
3. Media Pitches are
setting benchmarks
for media planning and buying
The more auditors and advertisers will include radio in
- pitch exercises
and
- cost& quality guarantees
The higher will be radio advertising effectiveness future
The more auditors and advertisers will include radio in
- pitch exercises
and
- cost& qualityquality guarantees
The higher will be radio advertising effectiveness future
… and differences between Knowing and Doing fade away!… and differences between Knowing and Doing fade away!

57. Contents
Introduction
Media Auditing in a snapshot
The Italian Scenario
The Importance of building and maintaining Pools for radio auditing.
Planning and Buying Radio: Most common Inefficiencies
5 guidelines
-- Auditing the future: key trend

58. Future Scenarios
Advertisers are moving towards
. Total advertising expenditure control/audit
. Consistent and measurable Innovation
Advertisers are moving towards
. Total advertising expenditure control/audit
. Consistent and measurable Innovation
Media Auditors should step into:
. Audited Engagement
(from auditing traditional advertising to auditing all kinds of advertising)
Media Auditors should step into:
. Audited Engagement
(from auditing traditional advertising to auditing all kinds of advertising)