The papers and trades are all aflutter this week with reports that the upfront is back; network television is back; the 30-second spot is back, based on assertions/projections that this year's 30-second spot lovefest should bring in anywhere from $9-$9.3bn.
Last year's number around $8.75bn would make the increase in the region of 2.5-5%.
CPM increases are projected to come in around as high as 7-9% for ABC with even struggling NBC coming in around 3-5%.
Huh?
Let me get this right. Audience numbers continue to decline. Channels continue to proliferate. Adoption of DVR's continue to rise. Consumer generated content continues to increase. Blogs, Podcasts and Virtual Worlds continue to grow.
And we've decided to go back to the tried and tested?
Let's ask departing CMO of 30-second spot obsessed Gatorade, Cindy Alston, what she thinks of this logic-flow, shall we?
So what does this mean? Are we out the woods or is this nothing more than a cruel joke; an illusion; the mirage of an oasis in an endless and brutal parched desert?
If the reports are in fact confirmed, we're talking about a 5% increase of about $350 million dollars, which would put network TV's booty (much like my booty i.e. fatblogging exploits) back in a holding pattern, establishing over the past 3-5 years.
Personally, I believe that money could and should be smarter allocated elsewhere, as I joked yesterday with a reporter....how about investing some of this money in the blogosphere? Hell, if you were GM you could buy the entire blogosphere, let alone sponsor it.
But back to the subject at hand. Has the storm cleared or is this a temporary reprieve...kind of like the eye of the storm? For starters, there are always going to be seasonal/economic in play.
People still watch television. And although cable has continued to flex its muscles with improved programming quality, people still use the rule of 5 fingers when it comes to viewership i.e. 2 (CBS), 4 (NBC), 5 (Fox), 7 (ABC) and that other one. But are they watching commercials? We know the answer to that question, don't we? I can't tell you the number of senior marketers who skip EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL WITH THEIR TIVO'S, and yet somehow believe their consumers are less sophisticated or intelligent to do the same.
Another factor is going to be the shift to commercial ratings and the fact marketers would be paying for time-shifted viewership and it's probably here, that you'll get the best idea of the delusional drunkedness that proves well and truly that we're living in the Twilight Zone.
Here are some clips from the LA Times article:
Industry executives said they anticipated that the audience for commercials would be about 5% lower than the ratings for the program the advertisements appear in.
The networks, however, are offsetting any decline in advertising dollars that result from lower ratings, because for the first time they will be paid for viewers who digitally record a program and watch it later.
Last year advertisers refused to pay for those viewers. But that audience could no longer be ignored, as about 17% of homes with televisions in the U.S. are now equipped with digital recorders. Advertisers will now pay for viewers who watched a show within three days after it was recorded.
Allowing that audience to be counted is likely to bring in additional hundreds of millions of dollars to the networks. The most popular programs tend to have the highest rates of recording and playbacks, so networks with the top shows will benefit the most.
"We're finding that a little more than a third of the people who delayed their viewing ended up watching the commercials," Schwartz said. "And we need to give value to the people who are watching the commercials."
I feel like Shaggy or Scooby right now. I just found the missing diamonds and pulled the sheet from the ghost to reveal a sad, pitiful old man looking for attention.
To recap, we're saying that all is good in TVland, because we believe 95% of TV-watching consumers who watch content will also watch commercials, coupled with 33% of DVR owners who just can't tear themselves away from the screen with feminine-hygiene bursts onto the scene.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I'm curious if that 33% include fast-forwarding stats in the "watching" data, and while we're at it....I wonder if the 95% (assuming this number is correct) specifies the difference between "was watching and paying attention" versus "making a sandwich, taking a dump, checking e-mail" etc.
Come on people. Wake up and smell the roses before you go the same way as every other CMO seems to be going nowadays. Grow some figurative balls or at the very minimum, use your brains or trust that gnawing feeling deep down in your gut. Surely you realize you're in the eye of the perfect storm and the worst is yet to come, don't you?
