MySpace reveals sponsorship effectiveness data for Kiss Or Miss
Social networking site MySpace has released results which it says prove the ROI around sponsoring its video shows.
MySpace integrated Bonds and Spring Valley into its Kiss Or Miss dating show, which ran online during March and April.
research conducted by Nielsen Online assessed the attitudes of MySpace users to the two bands depending won whether they had viewed Kiss Or Miss or not.
It found that:
Meaningless.
“People who watched MySpace Kiss or Miss were much more likely to buy the products associated with it.”
No way!
Hi james / Mr O,
Perhaps it should be obvious, but I don’t think I actually do get to see much evidence of effectiveness in advertising or sponsorship spend.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Agree with Tim, although it is hard to know whether the effectiveness study data is a correct reflection of the value of the sponsorship of Kiss or Miss, it is good to see publishers investing in extra measurement (other than 000’s).
It is always pretty easy to categorically dismiss these sorts of ‘finding’ and not offer anything constructive.
Some information on how sales went over the time (and relationship with the campaign) might also have strengthened the argument.
I also agree with Tim. I’d love to see more measurement of the impact our campaigns have, particularly for online.
As agencies we inherently believe our campaigns are having an effect – but what effect and to what degree?
I don’t think anyone disputes that campaigns have an effect … which is illustrated through control/exposed methods … but this measurement doesn’t tie back media investment to ROI.
The key question still remains ‘did the $X I spent on Y channel deliver me better results than spending the $X elsewhere’. The results supplied don’t answer this, they tell us that the advertising had an impact which would have been an implied minimum outcome when the activity was signed off.
It’s great to get effectiveness measurements for a campaign, many clients don’t or can’t afford to include this level of measurement into their campaigns (I believe the above campaigns had this measurement tied into the buy if I recall correctly). But as we all know, there is a major difference between saying you’d intend to buy versus actually going out and buying it.
That said, I’d love it if more clients would include pre- and post-testing for the online campaigns, or include online pre- and post- as part of an overall campaign measurement.
Further to Ben’s point, you’d have to be mindful of actual business goals (remember uni? goals have to be smart, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely) to form the basis of any sort of reporting, even if it means helping clients set these goals before you start any activity.
There is always a big issue with regards to intended and claimed behaviour versus actual. I’ve intended to lose 10kg each year since January was invented. Ain’t happened yet.
Marketers want to sell stuff and want to know if the money they spend does that in the best way possible.
Any study validating brand effectiveness online is worth it… there are still categories out there who dont spend much online e.g. FMCG – who are influenced by tradtional brand metrics more so than web metrics alone.
Ben – agree with your point re validating the spend. At Nova, we are conducting a radio+online effectiveness study using contolled / exposed methods – measuring the incremental benefit (if any) of using online with radio – measured against the incremental spend.
Will be sure to send through to you & Tim…
Cheers
Mo
Kiss or Miss was more about product placement and branded content. It just happened to be delivered online and within a social network. Agree with Chris Walton, also measuring engagement in social networks should not be using the same metrics as traditional advertising. What happens when those brands disappear when the “campaign” is over? What about the lost opportunity of building ongoing brand relationship? And for those interested in measuring engagement in social media, SMCSYD’s July event will tackle metrics and measurement
Web TV shows are a laboratory where the hottest innovation in advertising is taking place!
Ben, I agree on the ROI stance, but the issue is that we normally have a specific medium or a channel in a medium conducting the effectiveness research. This is the root cause of why there is no comparative channel reporting done – and why would MySpace spend their preciuous research dollars on other channels or media?
When you think about it, only one or two parties are privy to the communications plan in its entirety – the advertiser and the media agency (and even then it often doesn’t include BTL activity if it is the media agency). I also agree that in order to gauge ROI it must be on ‘hard’ measures like sales, calls, etc, and not ‘soft’ measures like intention (Chris … only 10kg?!?! – just kidding mate!). However, I am continually disappointed by the gulf between the (correct) loud call for ROI from advertisers and the lack of serious industry and hard yards put in by advertisers to establish holistic ROI models for their brands and communications activities.