fbpx
Connect with us

Tech

Media Buying Briefing: Four takeaways on Upfront Week from a buyer’s perspective

Published

on

Media Buying Briefing: Four takeaways on Upfront Week from a buyer’s perspective

Thanks to Paramount Advertising for sponsoring Digiday’s upfront week coverage and presenting this edition of the Digiday+ Media Buying Briefing, normally available exclusively to paying subscribers.

The annual cavalcade of upfront presentations by the dwindling number of TV media titans is over, and many media buyers and marketers hopefully took a long weekend to recover from attending all of the parties. More than one media buyer I spoke with at the end of last week was practically hoarse from talking so much.

Much was learned last week about where the state of video (as an umbrella term) is headed, and how marketers, through their media agencies, plan to harness it (or not, as explained below).

Let’s start with the fact that there were even live IRL upfront presentations at all. Including the 10 days of NewFronts at the beginning of May, buyers have expressed enthusiasm over being able to gather in person again following two years of virtual presentations, which couldn’t quite convey the same level of excitement as seeing Miley Cyrus or Lizzo perform or Sylvester Stallone expound on Covid.

“I think it shows that people wanted to be in New York, people wanted to get together, people wanted to have conversations,” said Carrie Drinkwater, Mediahub’s chief investment officer. “I think it demonstrated the importance of connection and not doing these deals over Zooms or through Excel sheets.”

I’ve been paying attention in some form or another to the Upfronts since 1991 when few people outside the TV business or media agencies knew what an upfront was. Here are my takeaways at what has likely been a pivotal week in the history of TV/video: 

Off to the races — but it may be a marathon 

Most media buyers I spoke with expect the market to start moving pretty immediately if it hasn’t already started. They concurred that, given the recent darkening clouds on the economic horizon, media sellers are eager to lay money in. It doesn’t help that clients are also said to be reducing their budgets, as clients take money off the books and return it to the bottom line.

Expect to see deals get cut as early as this week, with linear competing with the major digital players to increase dollar volume. Last year, with linear networks seeking and largely getting massive CPM increases, often north of 20 percent over the prior year, their total upfront dollar intake took a hit, as they counted on momentum continuing into scatter. Now that the scatter market has cooled considerably, networks want to lay in extra volume. 

But that may not happen. One buyer who spoke on condition of anonymity, said “That money doesn’t necessarily go back” to the networks that spurned it last year. ”Once it goes to somewhere else, it’s not like we say, ‘Alright, but next year, we’re gonna try to move that money back.’”

Living in a post-schedule world

More than one buyer noticed the absence of schedules, save Paramount/CBS. This is very much the result of content being offered more on-demand than ever. “This week we’ve seen the reality of the world, which is, ‘Let’s present you content and the access points and not worry about how this show’s gonna be on Monday night at X time,’ like the old days,” said one top investment chief. “While it’s important to understand schedules for allocations per quarter, there’s a new world which is, ‘I want my content when I want it, and I want it to be consumer-friendly.’ And that’s what all these partners have done a pretty good job of presenting from their capabilities.”

Streaming takes the front seat

Nearly every buyer agreed that streaming services are the higher priority to sell this season. “We definitely saw that a lot of streaming was a main topic of every presentation,” said Amy Ginsberg, chief investment officer at Havas Media Group.

After all, it’s where audiences keep gravitating in larger numbers. But there’s another value to streaming that comes at the expense of linear TV that perhaps the sellers didn’t intend. One major media buyer had an epiphany moment listening to NBCU talking about how network shows would repeat on Peacock, for which NBC is looking to sell distinct inventory — which to this buyer seemed like double-dipping. “Why am I going to pay for it on Peacock and also pay for it on your linear network?” asked the buyer.

Currency, what currency? 

The drumbeats leading up to Upfront Week told a story of networks pushing alternative currencies, as each major media company seemed aligned with one or the other (NBCU and iSpotTV, CBS/Paramount with Videoamp, etc.). That didn’t materialize last week, as buyers and sellers seemed to tacitly agree this is not the year to test alternative currencies in any significant way. 

“I do think there’ll be some transactions on non-Nielsen currencies this upfront. It just won’t be at scale,” said Celeste Castle, EVP of research & measurement, dentsu Media U.S. 

That lack of scale is probably for the better, as more than one holding company media agency exec told of the potential for error and confusion since virtually every agency is set to analyze and measure buys off a Nielsen base. “A client is not going to let NBC guarantee their stuff on iSpot and CBS guarantee their stuff on Comscore, and Warner guarantee their stuff on whatever,” said a measurement executive with a major media agency. “That client has to be consistent. So I’m thinking, could you have multiple currencies? Sure. But how are you going to manage your inventory, and then put a value against it? There are so many questions out there.”

Two things all buyers agree on: testing the alternatives needs to happen, and soon — just not in the upfront — because problems with Nielsen persist. Secondly, before any significant amount of transacting gets done on these alternatives, someone’s going to have to figure out who pays for all this. Because it doesn’t come cheaply.

In sum, it’s been a fascinating market to follow, and there will be a few more stories told in coming weeks about how this all shakes out.

Color by numbers

As the industry slides into buying and selling ad inventory for the coming season, iSpot.TV offers up these stats that encompass the prior TV season (from Sept. 6, 2021 to May 8, 2022):

  • There were 1.8 trillion total TV impressions, which represents a 6.8 percent increase over the prior season.
  • There were 678.2 billion ad impressions over that same time frame, which is a 4.7 percent increase.

Takeoff & landing

  • IPG-owned media agency Mediahub landed media AOR duties for rideshare service Lyft, which does the lion’s share of its advertising on digital. VaynerMedia had handled digital duties but didn’t participate in the client’s review.
  • Creator commerce company Whalar last week acquired talent & management company, C Talent, which specializes in managing deaf and disabled talent. 
  • S4 Capital acquired tech services and engineering firm Theorem One to help boost its target goal to make tech services 25 percent of its business. 

Direct quote

“In every upfront presentation, they all [claim to have] the fastest growing streaming networks. They all rate the best at X, Y and Z, and It’s the same story. And only one can be right. And that’s what I think is the trick in all this — making sure you know which one’s right when you leave the presentations and you go back to your desk, and you’ve done all this work beforehand.”

— One major chief investment officer, speaking to the similarities of media sellers’ streaming pitches.

Speed reading

https://digiday.com/?p=448875

Go to Source

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Tech

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 vs. AMD Radeon 6950 XT: Which GPU should you buy?

Published

on

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 vs. AMD Radeon 6950 XT: Which GPU should you buy?

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Go to Source

Continue Reading

Tech

Receive near instant feedback on logos, images, text, and more with Helpfull

Published

on

Receive near instant feedback on logos, images, text, and more with Helpfull

Feedback software

StackCommerce

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Go to Source

Continue Reading

Tech

Confessions of an in-house creative strategist on feeling unfulfilled, difficulty in returning to agencies as the ‘pay is less’

Published

on

Confessions of an in-house creative strategist on feeling unfulfilled, difficulty in returning to agencies as the ‘pay is less’

The war for talent between agencies and brands’ in-house agencies has cooled. Even so, for adland talent who’ve made the move in-house, some say they are looking to go back to agencies after feeling creatively stifled. It’s not the easiest strategy to execute.

In the latest edition of our Confessions series, in which we trade anonymity for candor, we hear from an in-house creative strategist about their experience, why they want to go agency-side now and how pay is keeping them from doing so.

This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

What’s the in-house experience like?

I’ve been in-house for about a year. It’s very one-sided. The difference between agency and in-house is that with agencies, there [are] a lot of opinions and ideas [outside of the brand message] that go into creative. With in-house, you have the brand’s message and all creative is reflective of the brand’s message. With in-house, regardless of trends in the market, it’s a lot of ‘we’re going to stick to this one way of doing things’ mentality. It’s a lot of opinions about what the creative should be based on what it has been before. It makes it hard to introduce something fresh. It makes it hard to hire or be a new hire. If you’re not actually going to adhere to advice from new hires, what’s the point in getting new people? Are you just bringing people on board for a second opinion? That’s what it feels like.

Sounds like you don’t have the creative control you desire.

It feels like more of a second opinion role than to get something to manage or control. [Where I am now] it feels like we’re leaning more into what [our strategy] used to be than thinking about what we could be. That’s a big issue with in-house. With agencies, like I said, there’s a lot more trial and error. With in-house, a lot more of this is what we’re doing, these are the funds we have and this is what has worked in the past. In reality, a lot of what worked in the past, when you put it back into the market, it’s not going to work anymore. 

Why do you think it’s more challenging to get to a new creative strategy in-house?

With agencies, you have multiple perspectives. You’re working on multiple brands. You can see something working for another brand and talk to your client about it. You can pivot. You have the background and perspective to [pitch that pivot]. When you’re in-house, you only have the knowledge of your brand and what’s working for you. 

Are you looking to go back to agencies? 

Personally, I am looking to go from in-house to agency but I get paid a lot more being in-house than what I’ve been offered at agencies. I’ve been in interviews with agencies where they’re telling me that I’ll be learning [programs I already know how to use] so that’s why the pay is less than what it should be. There are agencies I’ve interviewed with who ask me to move to New York for less than what I make now and make that work. [With inflation,] there’s no reason why salaries aren’t also increasing. 

So you’d like to make the jump creatively but it’s hard when the compensation isn’t up to what in-house offers? 

It’s hard. I’ve been lowballed, too. They’ll post a salary for a position, go through the interviews and then offer less than what’s listed on the salary description. What was the point of putting the salary range there? I feel like people are putting salary ranges on job descriptions just to attract people with the experience that they are looking for but by the time they make the offer, it’s not what they said it would be. It’s offensive.

https://digiday.com/?p=452660

Go to Source

Continue Reading
Home | Latest News | Tech | Media Buying Briefing: Four takeaways on Upfront Week from a buyer’s perspective
a

Market

Trending