Bad news for advertisers
p2p news / p2pnet: Shock-horror news for advertisers.
TV and web ads are "still valuable" with the younger demographics (that’s you ; ) but they’re, "not nearly as powerful as the trailer or a friend’s recommendation." says an industry report.
"Most significantly, those older than 35 reported that [cinema] commercials are among the least influential factors, ranking only ahead of the movie’s director, an Internet posting and newspaper content. As for a theater’s attributes, those surveyed picked cleanliness and ambiance as the most important."
The terrible news came at Showest, continues a Reuters/Hollywood Reporter story.
"The bottom line is people say they hate commercials, but in reality they go to the movies they want to see no matter what," it has Nielsen Entertainment’s Adrienne Becker, who presented the report, saying. Exhibitors must, "recapture the younger demographics as part of this moviegoing experience." She added, "Igniting passion in the moviegoing experience for them is going to be the key to changing the trends we are seeing now."
Also at Showest, Hollywood front man China Dan Glickman announced, "I’ve directed the staff of the MPAA (Moribund Picture Association of America) to conduct research into these and other important questions – the first time we as an association have undertaken such a project.
"When I was at the Department of Agriculture, industries like pork, beef and milk spent a lot of money promoting generically the value of these products. Not any specific brand name, but the foods themselves. Not to suggest that the movies are like pork chops."
Indeed not.
But a tax-payer funded National Movie Week would, "generate enthusiasm, excitement and better understanding of movies," Glickman declared.
"He is obviously lost in space," wrote a p2pnet reader in a comment post. "It’s done. The old system is finished.
"Anyone can make a ‘Hollywood’ movie with a $1500 camcorder and free software for video editing and on a $500 budget to boot.
"We don’t need actors who are payed tens of millions of dollars and movie executives and middle men. Anyone can make a web site and promote their film for $20 a month.
"The party’s over hollywood, read my lips ‘over’. "Look at the facts.
"duh."
Also See:
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter – Theater ads don’t stop moviegoers, study says, March 16, 2006
pork, beef and milk – Pork chops, the MPAA and movies, March 5, 2006
March 17th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
Amen…
Just look at some of the most influential movies of the past couple years. Even though Saw had a bigger budget than 500 bucks, it was still very much an independant movie with guys who started from the bottom.
But yeah… the only time I watch Commercials are for the Super Bowl, and this year they were good, but not the best. And it ticked me off when they started putting commercials in the beginning for movies that I, myself, payed for. If ticket prices are suffering that they need to do this, then they need to release better films. Last year’s snore fest was the worst. I think I went to the movies 3 times the WHOLE year. Now this year, there are all sorts of movies I want to see, but I will make sure I come in a little late so I can bypass the stupid commercials.
March 18th, 2006 at 2:17 am
You mean it was NEWS to them that people don’t want to see commercials ????????? After the invention of DVRs, VCRs, and DVD recorders they still didn’t catch on ?
March 18th, 2006 at 8:22 am
They’re bigbiz exec’s. They’re simply incapable of learning or changing their behaviour to suit different circumstances.
Kind of like dinosaurs…
March 18th, 2006 at 12:06 pm
Advertisemt is like war. Only those in the advertisement benefit. Those that pay for advertisement (big corporations) are proded into spending huge amounts of money into advertisement because ad companies also do ads for the competition. So instead of improving products or increasing profits for sharwholders or lowering prices, the money is spent on useless ads.
Ads only cancel themselves, like war machinnery development, which only prods the enemy to also develop their machinnery, making the war machinnery producers the only winners. The people on both sides are the losers.
Now that politicians are openly ad agency driven and sold like Hollywood movie stars, the whole ad industry has become uncontrolled in the great damage it does to the people.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com
March 18th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
This is no news to anyone. The ad agencies don’t want to hear this as it is their source of income. Corporations don’t want to hear it because it’s a great tax write off.
People have gotten to where they turn off the brain when it comes to ads. When it’s on the radio their thinking of what’s for dinner or where do I have to make that turn coming up at. When it’s on the tv, it’s break time. When it’s on the movies, they’ve the captive audience. Trouble with ads is that it’s income to broadcasters. Naturally everyone and their bother wants more income. So now you don’t get the occasional ad, you get them in batches. TV shows come with built in spaces for ads. That’s why a show is never a half hour long or a multiple of it. In a 1/2 hour show you’re lucky if it is 20 minutes long. The ad time is waste time as far as I am concerned.
That’s one of the reasons that the mobile players came into being, the other being the ability to play your choice instead of the random bombardment that comes through the commercial channels.
I always think there is something wrong with the product if they have to advertise. We all know that corporations are concerned with sales figures and if they droop then it is ad time. People that find products that work tell others. If it does the job, as billed, is reasonable in cost, then they are not bashful about telling a stranger. Imagine, free advertisement. Likewise they will tell you not to buy something if it doesn’t live up to it’s billing.
Just because a product is at the head of the aisle, at chest height doesn’t mean it is good. It usually means that the placement was paid for by the company whose product rests there. That doesn’t strike me as being a good value for the money. You the customer pay for that in the product price. Of what value is where it is placed on the shelf as part of the price? When I buy stuff at the store, I think of these things. I also think of the ads and purposely don’t buy those products whose ads are intrusive. Why should I reward someone for doing something I resent?
March 20th, 2006 at 4:38 am
You’re all right. It’s not that there is any surprise here. It’s just tough news because as one of you stated, it forces the buy and sell side of advertising to question their long standing business practices. Look, the other part of what I said wasn’t picked up by the press so let me re-state it here:
Advertising eventually will provide a valuable service to people. Companies are amassing such data on my preferences that some day they will send me only completely salient advertising messages, ones that I could possibly welcome into my media world.
Yes, of course this is at once terrifying and possibly interesting, no illusions there about some commercial enterprise knowing more about me and my family than I do. That’s another conversation and certainly one worth having.
But on the subject at hand, in order to have that one-to-one communication, new channels are needed, yes such as mobile. And eventually movigoing as we now know it might become more interactive; imagine interactive polls to determine what movie should play at which theater and when…and through voting, your demographics/even better your psychographics are entered and therefore, like population segments are viewing movies together. This gives ads an increased probability that they will resonate in a way that is welcome as opposed to offensive.
Realistically, this is a long way off. Until then, theaters are faced with economic choices, do they charge more per ticket and create ad-free environments? Or do they keep ticket prices relatively low (compared to things such as inflationary growth), though at the expense of running too many, mediocre, non-relevant commercial messages. And of course, the people making the content understandably don’t want you to have to sit through anything less than perfect before you watch their movie. They want your moviegoing experience to be as entertaining, in a positive way, as possible.
Stay tuned, much more discussion and change on the horizon.
Adrienne Becker
Nielsen Entertainment
Author, The Avid Moviegoer
Presented at ShoWest 2006
March 20th, 2006 at 10:22 am
I wrote the post you answered to. I’m sorry but I strongly disagree with you. I don’t want ads. I don’t want to hear what I might be interested in, I certainly don’t want to hear what I am not interested in.
From your title that you put at the bottom it appears you have a vested interest in this, so I guess I understand where you are coming from.
The reality to me is that hearing ads in any form is wasted time. Time that could be better put to use than hearing something I have neither the desire to hear nor wish to spend the time doing. These ads are no less than forced on you. It’s not an option to be in peace without them and here rests the kernel of the problem.
There are far too many business and corporations that want your data. I dont want them to have it. There are things called privacy and privacy issues. You have but to read about how many hackers get into data bases to obtain credit card numbers improperly secured by that data collection, or surveys that ask for data that anyone in their right mind should be thinking about answering with sceptism.
This privacy invasion is something I seriously resent. I don’t want to be denied heath care because my dna rests on my passport and the data has worked its way into the health insurance database. Nor do I wish that because I bought an item in a store that the RFID tag has displayed not only what I purchased but continues to track me by being embedded in my purchase after I get home. (the embedded part is coming and prototypes already exist and articles have been put out here for viewing.)
Call it what you wish but I do resent this steady chipping away at both my privacy and my supposedly granted rights.