on commercial load - gma7 misses the point : part 2

the press statement of gma7 on the issue of commercial load on tv programs is a lame attempt to justify or rationalize their action. assuming they mean what they said in the press statement, the only other viable conclusion is gma7 is missing the point on why the KBP has imposed a limit on commercial load in tv programs.

it's not about financials or revenues or as they call it "restraint of trade" that is being imposed on them by the KBP, it's about avoiding audience fatigue on watching too many commercials.

the audience watch tv to watch the tv shows, not the commercials. commercials shown in these tv programs are a disruption to the enjoyment of the tv shows by the audience. loading tv programs with too many commercials will force the audience to tune off when the ads are shown. tv commercials actually is actually an irritant to tv watching.

by now, the audience know that a commercial break will have 4 to 6 commercials and with the tv remote in their hand, the audience will probably change channel at the latest on the 2nd commercial that is shown. that means there will be a lot of ads in that commercial break that viewers will not watch.

that is not good for the ad industry. as abrera has said, by now it's possible this overload of tv ads would have taught the audience a new habit of zapping out of tv ads. what good will that do to the ad industry?

my point of view is that the broadcast industry should impose a low number of commercial load. to compensate, tv stations should increase their cost per spot accordingly so that the total revenues they earn from the total commercial minutes will be the same. if for example they now have a commercial load of 6 ads per gap, and they charge P200T/spot for a total of P1.2M per gap; they should reduce the commercial load to just 4 ads per gap but increase the charge to P300T/spot for still a total of P1.2M revenues per gap. no loss of revenue for the tv station but a more pleasant viewing experience for the audience and a better appreciation of the ads.

i think the ad industry as a whole will benefit more in the long run with less ads on tv. so what if the cost per spot goes up? that's a good thing. tv advertising is not for every client, we don't have to make it affordable to small clients or brands with small budgets. the truth is there are just too many brands advertising on tv who go on air just for a very short airing period for lack of budget. if the ad agency will be honest about it, the truth is airing a tv ad campaign on a short airing period is as effective as not airing a tv ad at all.

increasing the cost per spot of tv ads to the level of making it unaffordable to small clients and brands with small budgets will force ad agencies to be honest with their clients and will stop ad agencies from recommending tv advertising to all of its clients just for the sake of earning revenues but no real impact on business building.

tv is not the only advertising medium available for clients to use. and in fact media other than tv in many instances are a better fit for some brands and definitely more cost effective.

making cost per spot very prohibitive will also force ad agencies to work harder at coming up with better and more creative tv advertising. with it's cost very high, clients will now be more demanding on their ad agencies when it comes to tv ads. clients will say, you're making me pay so much for tv ads, you better make sure you come up with great ads.

also, the tv stations should know commercial air time is a seller's market. there are only two viable tv stations in the country, ABS-CBN and GMA7. the ad industry has no choice but to buy commercial air time from them. they can sell their tv spots at P200T/spot or P500T/spot and the ad agencies and clients will continue to buy them. they have no other choice.

just to illustrate the point i am making - look at the super bowl in the US. 1 30 second tv spot in the 2008 super bowl cost P2.7 Million! super bowl commercial airtime is the highest cost in all of TV in the US.

and guess what? the ad industry and clients continue ro buy commercial airtime in the super bowl, cost per spot does not matter. why not? that's because the super bowl has a very high audience rating, the highest in the year. that is also true in the philippines - ad agencies and clients buy spots based on audience rating. they will buy into a tv show no matter what the cost is as long as it delivers in audience rating.

what about the quality of the ads aired? clients and ad agencies air the best and the most creative ads during the super bowl. looking for the funniest. most memorable and most effective ad during the super bowl has become a side tradition to watching the super bowl for the audience. day after the super bowl the audience don't just talk about the great plays in the super bowl, they also talk about the great ads they saw during the game.

airing the best ad during the super bowl has even become like a side competition among the ad agencies. their work getting ranked as best in the super bowl earns them prestige and precious bragging rights.

and that is the point i am making here. if philippine television makes it's cost per spot higher but lower the number of commercial load per program, the audience will be happier and will watch all the commercials making the ads more effective in doing their job. and because it involves higher cost for clients, it will make them demand better quality ads from the ad industry.

the net effect will be : better quality and more effective ads and a happier audience. isn't that what we all want?