Does business think super bowl ads are worth $4 million?
http://adage.com/article/special-report-super-bowl/game-time-decision-super-bowl-worth-4-million/245091/
http://adage.com/article/special-report-super-bowl/game-time-decision-super-bowl-worth-4-million/245091/
54 comments:
I think the 4 million is worth it if your company uses it in the right way. The commercials need to be used to "supercharge" a brand, they are not meant to promote short term sales or help a new brand establish themselves in a market. At the same time the brand need to make sure that they make the viewer remember what product the ad was about. If not it was a waste of 4 mil.
I think that it depends on the company. If a new and upcoming company spends all of their money on one commercial, but does not have the capacity to act on their new exposure, it wouldn't be worth it. For a company like Budweiser, however, it is absolutely worth it. They can easily afford the 4M ad. They also assert their dominance and advertising expertise over the rest of their competition.
I think that is depends on the company. A new and upcoming company that would need to expend all of their assets to afford the super bowl ad would not benefit from such an expense. A company like Budweiser, however, can absolutely benefit from a Super Bowl ad. An ad can show dominance against their competition, as well as show their advertising skill. In turn, it can reassert its dominance over a market share.
I think that the 4 million for a Super Bowl ad is worth it for larger companies but not so much for the smaller companies. Putting an ad in the Super Bowl is a huge risk - for larger companies such as Budweiser an ad that maybe isn't that much of a hit isn't going to break the company. Also, I don't think the Super Bowl is the place for companies trying to launch a product - unless they are playing off the same premise of an already successful product. For example, Budweiser launching a new type of beverage would be different than an entirely new brewing company trying to launch their products.
Depends on the product and content more than the company. Apple's 1984 commercial is an example. If the company can create a buzz and back it with a quality product it becomes totally worth it. If you have a so-so product or don't stand behind it then it is probably not worth the 4 million.
As always the case with anything, there are two side to the coin. It either is a brilliant idea, or a complete flop. I think it all depends on the type of add. These days, everyone talks about the Super Bowl ads almost as much as the game itself. "Cant wait to see the commercials." The problem is that most people expect the ads to be comical. Some are not and are still good. That is ok. But the perception of ads during the Bowl has built a reputation of being funny. The problem with funny is not everyone thinks the same way. A funny ad to someone could be completely stupid to another person. The biggest problem I see with Super Bowl ads is trying to find a way to please the billions of people watching. That is an impossible task. All in all, if the add captures the audience and convinces them that their product is worth buying, I don't believe there is a price too high for Super Bowl ads.
I think I have to agree with Molly on this one, spending the 4 million dollars is beneficial for companies that are worth billions of dollars, like Budweiser. Larger companies can afford to spend the millions of dollars on a single commercial.Not only do they reach all of America in one commercial but people are expecting for commercials to be extravagant.Each year the stakes are higher and brands compete on who will have the best commercial. Having a commercial during the Super bowl is a guarantee that all of America will watch it. Anyways, isn't spending 4 million dollars on a commercial worth it if it can increase the companies revenue?
Although the article did not mention it, I was hoping to read something about the cost of Dorito's Ad campaign this year. I have seen on the news that the videos are created by fans and voted by fans to the top five but I am not quite sure yet which ones will make it to the super bowl. I do not know if they have been doing this for a number of years or not but I would assume its cost a lot less than 4 Million dollars to have fans make your commercials. I know the videos are out there and have seen one on tv but I have tried to avoid watching them online so it will not ruin the "super bowl commercial" experience. because lets be honest, some people ONLY watch the super bowl for the commercials.
I think it depends on your company and what plans your company is having. Subway was not going to do Super Bowl commercials because it just wasn't needed for their plans. Other companies like Butterfinger Brand wanted to use the Super Bowl as huge exposer. If a 4 million dollar commercial can bring in more exposer and consumers then it just may be worth it. I would say the profits should in the end make up at least the 4 million hopefully sooner rather than later. It all just depends on what the game plan is for the company.
I think 4 million dollars is alot of money. However it does prove that you believe in your product enough to take the risk. Which as a consumer, makes me feel more comfortable in purchasing the product.
Paying 4 million for advertisement during the Super bowl is worth it if used correctly, but predicting whether most commercials will be a hit or not is difficult. The exposure you will receive is defiantly around the cost of 4 million, but the gamble is whether the reaction will be good or bad. If it was up to me I would be playing it safe this year and investing in the Winter Games. It is the ‘main’ event, but you can get a lot more time with 4 million there rather than the 30 seconds during the Super bowl.
$4 million dollars might be worth it if it is a well known company with a NEW product they want consumers to know about. On the other hand, there are so many other things that can be done with $4 million. I think a company would benefit more by spending that amount of money by helping the community, world, environment, etc. and receiving publicity for that.
"But for a lot of brands, nothing compares to the domestic reach of the Super Bowl..."
...unless a good chunk of your audience needs a potty break or needs to run out to 7-11 for more bean dip. Then that 4 mill is wasted and your only hope (and this is pretty much the norm nowadays anyway) is to put the spot on social media and let it travel virally.
The problem with TV advertising is that it doesn't last unless its "archived" on YouTube or some other internationally accessible website. I know there will be some cool commercials, but I'm not worried about missing them because they will surface on YouTube in the next couple days.
I'm sure there's prestige and satisfaction to see your work being aired during the Super Bowl, and there are some really great ideas amongst ad people nowadays. But I don't think any significant amount of money is justified for today's Super Bowl ads when you can create an online presence that's just as effective at conveying your product, creates a truly captive audience (the internet will be operational after you use the bathroom), and will last practically forever with minimal overhead.
February has become the start of the advertising season. At 4 million dollars/30 seconds, the Super Bowl has become a high stakes gamble that makes or break product lines. For American products, it has become irresistible. The Super bowl will reach 108 million people across every demographic, mainly in the US. For small companies launching new products, it is the best opportunity to distinguish itself. I question the value for international firms, especially this year. Both the Winter Olympics and The World Cup, there are cheaper ways to reach more people. The 2010 World Cup reached 3.2 Billion viewers worldwide, averaging 188 million viewers per match. Every match, from the early elimination round to the final, reach more consumers than the Superbowl while costing only 250 thousand dollars/30 seconds. The Championship match reached 619 million live viewers, six times the viewership for an eighth of the cost. For international firms, like Coca-cola or Yum! brand inc., it makes more sense to invest into larger platforms.
To build off of what @Ryan Carter said, I think super bowl ads have reached a new level of risk. Marketing departments now must produce a funny, appropriate, non - discriminatory, and innovative message. The ads are no longer simply "cute" or "fun." It's become serious, being the only portion of the game many people watch. With this new risk in mind, it is becoming increasingly difficult to justify $4 million in super bowl advertising.
Super bowl ads are worth $4 million to some businesses and not to others. It depends on which competitors are advertising, if new products are being launched, and who the business' target market is. As mentioned in the article, many businesses are opting to reach an international market by advertising during the Winter Olympics.
Car companies seemed to dominate the advertisements last night. For major automotive businesses, $4 million is a necessary expense. There were plenty of commercials, so enough other businesses must feel it is worthwhile.
I believe it depends on what your trying to sell. If your just reintroducing something that most people have already seen, then to me it's not worth $4 million. If they have something new to bring to the table, and if they believe that this product will sell good, then yes. It honestly just depends on what the company is selling and the company it's self. Bigger companies, like Pepsi, have that extra money there that if there commercial flops they are going to be okay. For the smaller companies that are not as well known, if there commercial doesn't help them, then they are out a lot of money.
If a company is going to spend $4 million on one 30-second advertisement, it must be for the right product. Super bowls ads are not likely to make someone go out and immediately start purchasing a specific product. The ad can be used to introduce a new product line from an already established company or be memorable enough for consumers to choose that product over something else at a later date. The ads should be created and used for increasing long-term sales not short-term sales. Each year companies must choose when and how best to use marketing budgets. For example, this year companies must choose whether spending $4 million on one ad is better than possibly spending the same amount on an entire week of ads during the Winter Olympics. I think it comes down to the company’s marketplace, consumer demographics, and longer-term marketing strategies.
Super Bowl commercial breaks have become an event of their own for advertisers to participate in. If big names don't participate, it almost makes me wonder if the company isn't doing so well. And, if ever you want to make a big statement about your company and/or product(s), it's during the Super Bowl. So, if you're able to solidify/improve your brand image with a Super Bowl commercial, it's probably worth the $4 million. However, if all you want to do is let consumers know about a new product feature, there are probably better ways to spend your money.
In my opinion, 4 million for a thirty second spot during the super bowl is a great idea for an up and coming company. According to the NFL, the Super Bowl broadcast will reach 198 countries and will be viewed in more than 25 languages. Media from 24 countries will provide on-site coverage, and more than 100 stations are broadcasting live from Radio Row at the Super Bowl Media Center in New York’s Times Square. There will be more than a 100 million people who see this ad. With that said, it better be a sure fire ad that can not be seen as controversial in any bad way! Especially if you are a up and coming company, you do not have room error and the collateral damage may difficult to overcome.
I think its worth noting that the average individual sees a sum like $4M as a very large sum of money, particular spent at one time. The reality is, as most of the students here have already noted, the number is relative to the business and is completely subjective. A similar argument was posed whether certain athletes who make eye-popping sums of money are worth it? Is Lebron James worth 30 million dollars a year?? Most people automatically say, no way!! In reality, the value added to the Miami Heat franchise the second Lebron James signed with respect to ticket sales, merchandising sales, etc...was well in excess of the 30 million spent in payroll. In summary, the $$ value, whether it be 4 million or X million, is irrelevant, the question is only whether the value of the expenditure was positive and economically sensible. This particular article poses the argument that X million could be better spent at the Winter Olympics.
I believe that Super bowl adds are worth spending $4 million. There are people that don't even follow football, but watch the Super bowl for the commercials and the half time show. People talk about it before and after the game.
The 4 million dollars is definitely worth it if there is a great idea behind the product for the commercial. Advertising at the Super Bowl is high risk, but also high reward. But first and foremost, companies need to ensure that the content of their commercial is not offensive to the millions of Americans watching. Coca Cola is now experiencing harsh criticism from some Conservatives for their ad which featured America the Beautiful sang in different languages. Other companies, however, have seen major success from Super Bowl ads such as Doritos. All in all, use your 30 seconds wisely.
Spend 4 million dollars on a Super Bowl commercial? Guess that all depends on each companies marketing strategy? For some, it’s an expense that makes sense. Others it’s money thrown away. The last paragraph in the article really put it into perspective for me when Steve Shannon, VP-marketing for Hyundai Motor America, mentioned that some ads, "While they may have been entertaining, the question is do people remember what brand they are for and did it tell them anything they really need to know about a car?" After watching this year’s Super Bowl, I can only recall a handful of commercials that provided imperative information about a product that I was actually interested in purchasing.
I do think it's a great way for large companies to get publicity, but I have noticed that (for people my age at least) the people who watch the Superbowl just for the ads view them as entertainment more than suggestions to buy a product. People talk more about the content of the commercial than the actual product being sold. Also, as the article mentioned, it can be difficult with some companies to trace an increase in revenue directly to the Superbowl ads because people aren't going to buy their product the next day just because of the commercial. Therefore, I think the hype of Superbowl ads is extremely high-priced when it doesn't need to be.
I did see the commercial for the Butterfinger Peanut Butter cups. With so many people having access to a television, especially when the Super Bowl is on, it is probably a really smart idea to have a commercial for your company on during. That being said, I never get excited for the Super Bowl commercials. I don't really think they're all that great! I've seen funnier, better commercials on during daytime television. However, the Super Bowl commercials obviously reach A LOT more people than the daytime commercials do. I definitely agree that it's probably smarter to do multiple commercials during the course of the Winter Olympics than it is to do just one commercial during the Super Bowl that will probably be shortly forgotten.
If your company is in place that it can realistically afford the advertisement without seeing an immediate or semi-immediate return then the Super-Bowl is a great idea for advertising. I think the comment about "super-charging a brand" is the best way of putting it. It is about making your presence known and your company stronger. $4Mil is a hefty toll for 30 seconds of advertisement, but with people watching solely for the advertisements, you are hitting an audience that is looking to be hit with advertisements. If they are looking forward to the campaigns and watching for them, that has to increase the value of advertising during the Superbowl as opposed to the Olympics where people bounce from channel to channel trying to follow the action. The Superbowl is worth every penny if done correctly.
I think it depends on the specific company and product being advertised to determine whether or not a Super Bowl commercial is worth $4 million. I agree with the article, that it can be worth the money to use a commercial to introduce a new product and for small companies that typically wouldn't get that much attention. I do think people may more attention to commercials during the super bowl than during any other TV show because the Super Bowl commercials have a reputation for being better. As an accountant, it would be hard for me to justify the expense because, as the article states, "The reason advertisers are on the game is because it supercharges their brand. It's just very hard to tie the [sales] numbers specifically back to that media buy." I think companies need to really think about the decision to buy a super bowl ad, rather than just assume the reward will be greater than the risk and pay at any cost.
Absolutely! In a capitalist society where the highest bidder wins and a Super Bowl commercial slot is the coveted prize, $4M is worth it. Of course I think they could probably get just as much viewers if they disburse their ads periodically over a month. It also depends on their target market. I'm sure some companies do it with the aim of mass marketing (GoDaddy) while others are reaching their target market (Budweiser).
A number of factors play a role in whether or not it is worth the four million dollar price tag. I think it makes sense if a company is planning on launching a new program, or has something new to announce. I see a number of commercials each year for companies that promote the same products they have been making for years. A number of commercials were released early this year, and put online. Commercials were also advertised saying they weren’t allowed to show the original commercial during the super bowl because they were too risqué.
A small company would easily be able to see the increase in business, but I don’t know how a company like Budweiser would be able to see the impact a super bowl commercial had on sales, given the amount they already advertise.
If the need as a company is to get a specific message out, such as a new product as in case for butterfinger this year, a super bowl add the 4M may be worth it. With the advent of DVR, Netflix, and other streaming services commercials are rarely being watched anymore. Sporting events are one of the only television shows that the public watches live anymore and therefore people must watch the commercials. During the super bowl the commercials are something people actually want to see. This makes it a rare opportunity where consumers actually want to see the commercials. If done properly the 4M price tag can be a steal for companies, however in the case of Groupon it can be a huge mistake. Companies need to go in with a clear goal and only a select few goals can be achieved in 30 seconds even in 100 million people are watching.
It seems having an ad in the Super bowl is more about prestige and entertainment than anything else. $4 million on an ad is ridiculous and yet sets the perfect stage for debuting their already awesome product. If a company has the leverage to pay for advertising in that capacity, than by all means do it (although I'm still convinced its more of an ego/brand boost than anything else). But to drop that kind of cash for a smaller and less known company, it definitely doesn't seem to be the smartest idea.
Super Bowl ads are most certainly not worth $4 mil, in most cases anyway. Sure, the Super Bowl has a very high amount of viewers. But, as Esurance showed in their commercial spot after the game, the money saved from not running an ad during that time can be used to market their product in a better way. They saved $1.5 mil and offered it to someone as long as they use a hashtag they want o twitter. More people were talking about that commercial than any during the game. That's great marketing!
In the case of $4 million for one ad it’s the classic reach over frequency debate. Many marketers believe that if they can just get enough people to listen to their message they’ll be successful but advertising is about which consumers remember your brand when it’s time to purchase. I believe that is done through a solid message and repetition. I would much rather own the hearts of fewer people and be the brand they think of and feel the best about, versus one shot at a larger group. It all comes down to objectives and the state of your company. If Coke can afford to run Super Bowl ads and continue a high frequency with their target market then the Super Bowl can be a great addition to the strategy. Companies that do the Super Bowl but can participate in little else should be skeptical. A large audience will guarantee success.
I believe that the 4million per 30 sec ads are worth it to the bigger companies, but most of the time the bigger companies that spend the money on these adds are companies that we already know of and have already used, bought or consumed their products. I think Bud Light takes the right approach when creating their ads, they often pull at the heartstrings of the viewers making it more memorable, often leading it to be talked about via word of mouth and social media. In those cases those ads were worth it.
I don't believe a four million dollar commercial would be worth the risk or money for any company, big or small. Bigger companies such as Google or Apple don't need to spend the money on a commercial because they already have a strong and reliable customer base. Even if the commercial is entertaining, I'm not sure it would actually sell more product. Smaller companies shouldn't spend the money on the commercial, because even if it brings more attention to your business, it doesn't guarantee any higher revenues. So a smaller company could end up losing millions just on one commercial. I believe companies would be better off in saving their money for more important costs and use cheaper ways of advertisement, such as: social media, regular tv commercials, and online advertisements.
In my opinion it is worth the money even though it may seem like a premium for a single ad. First an super bowl ad can bring a company to the next level and boost sales substantially which would otherwise not be made without the high price ad. Second, brand recognition, which is huge when marketing for a company. One super bowl ad can change the game for a company that would otherwise be unnoticed by the majority of the population. For example GoDaddy.com, this company completely put themselves on the radar of consumers throughout the world by using a "risky" ad that caught the attention of viewers. Another example would be Doritos, they in particular have went all out on brand recognition and reaching out to the majority of people with humor in their commercials. In conclusion the ad is worth every penny and will put a average company on the map and an established company to all new heights.
Of course the question of whether or not the $4 million price tag per 30 second commercial is worth it for a company depends entirely on what products/services they sell and/or what kind of campaign they are running. Companies like Budweiser are basically EXPECTED to show a commercial every year, whereas new/smaller companies may be more successful investing their advertising money elsewhere, unless they are introducing a new product/service/idea. If I'm in charge of a business that's going to spend that kind of money on a 30 second commercial, all I can say is it damn well better GRAB attention and get people talking/laughing or SOMETHING. I would also make the message appeal to as many potential customers as possible to ensure that I have a successful outcome.
Given that all of the advertising inventory was sold out two months before the game, it appears that the commercials really were worth $4 million each. Whether the advertisers themselves realize a return on their investment doesn't matter, as long as they believe they will, and are willing to continue to write the check to Fox.
Obviously, the price of the Super Bowl ads will be driven by the supply and demand for the advertisement space. As Jeff points out, as long as companies are willing to pay the premium to advertise during the game, CBS will gladly take their money. As for the value and return on investment on the $4M advertisement, that will greatly vary depending on the company. The publicity, consumer excitement, and visibility around Super Bowl ads may be worth the expense to some, but as the article points out, few customers are going to rush out and buy the product as a result of seeing the advertisement.
In my opinion paying that much money for a super bowl ad is obviously expensive but if the company feels its worth it then why not spend money so that their ads are seen by millions of people throughout the world. Some of the commercials work and some don't it really depends on how they want to go about getting peoples attention in the commercial. This year's super bowl commercials weren't that great but companies wanted to be seen and felt it was worth paying for.
One thing the article didn't address, what happens when the game is a blowout and your ad isn't showing until the 4th quarter. Honestly, I stopped paying attention in the 3rd quarter. I worked on homework and only occasionally glanced at the screen to see if, by some miracle, Denver was making a comeback. I imagine companies that spent $4 million for a 4th quarter ad were pissed off. With the Olympics, there are no doubt going to be closer events over the entire games. It might be a better investment for companies.
Personally, I think $4 million is a ridiculously expensive amount to spend on a single 30 second spot. However, I can see why companies will spend the money to get the large domestic exposure. For the auto companies, they pretty much have to buy Bowl ads because all their competitors are.
Superbowl ads while being a gamble I think are worth the risk if you are really trying to get your name out there or draw attention to a new product or campaign. There are lots of people who go to "watch parties" where they are more interested in the commercials than they are in the games. The commercials even become water cooler talk the next day at work. Based on this, for lesser known companies that can afford it, it can be a home run play. Interestingly, one aspect of running a spot that not a lot of people consider is the impact it can have on your corporate website. There are countless stories that come out where a Superbowl ad drove so much traffic to a corporate website that it crashed which in turn started a storm of bad publicity. As an IT performance engineer this is specifically the thing I work to prevent so it is always interesting to hear about the traffic driven web crashes as a result of the big game.
I think spending $4million on a ad is a little excessive. I do however think that it all depends on the company. I don't think if your a company just starting out that you should spend that much, but if you a big company like budweiser or doritos yes you should spend 4million dollars to keep up with the competition.
A commercial that costs this much may not benifit a smaller company but for would for large corporations. So many people watch the superbowl that the returns from the ad could out weigh the costs for the ad. It is common for car companies and beers to have popular commercials for the superbowl. when you think of budweiser or volkswagon this 4 million isn`t a problem.
I think that Super Bowl ads are far overrated... For example, think of the amount of increased sales that it would take to offset the price of these ads... at the very least: 4 million dollars in profit. I think a lot depends on how good of a game it is going to be also. For example this year's Super Bowl would have been a waste of time and money for any companies that had a spot in the second half. In all, these ads are a huge gamble extremely unlikely to pay off - but like the article says: these big automakers are expected to have ads in the big game and people will notice if they don't.
you could say a lot of companies would say its worth four million dollars to have a AD in the super bowl. so they can get there name out and raise awareness of the company and sales. not all companies have four million dollars to spend. some are already a well known company so they don't really need the publicity. so it can go either way it just depends on if you think your name is known well enough
I felt that the goal of the Super bowl ads are more than trying to reach out to the millions of Americans who are watching the game, but it is showing how much the company believe in their product and willing to pay the price to promote it such a high price. I think it is also a way of being American as much as possible, participating in a family traditional event usually will help a person or in this case a product or company be embraced by the family and this time these companies and thier products are embraced by millions of American family during the Super Bowl night.
I felt that the Super Bowl ads are more than just reaching out to millions of people watching the game, but by participating shows how much the company values their product so much so that they are willing to deliver it to the audiences are such a high price. I remember when I first arrived in the U.S., I was invited to a Super Bowl party at a friend's place together with 3 other families, I find it hard at first understanding the game but they were telling me to just focus on the advertisement, which I did and find it very entertaining.
I also realized that the Super Bowl ads is about becoming American. When I join the family watching Super Bowl, I felt like I am being embraced as part of the family and begin to realized that the ads too are coming into the family and being embraced by them.
If companies are typically using Super Bowl ads to "supercharge" their brand, then that $4 million may be worth it, especially if the ad persuades consumers to view the company in a higher echelon than its competitors. The difference may not be immediate, but down the line consumers may still remember the ads (or at least the impression they got from the ads) when they are making purchasing decisions.
There are several factors to consider when evaluating whether or not to advertise through Super Bowl commercials. Who is your target market? What industry is the company in? What is your marketing strategy? What is the expected return on investment? Is there a better way to spend $4 million? It is interesting to consider advertising through the Winter Olympics instead of the Super Bowl and of course there are companies that will advertise during both major sporting events.
From reading the article, it seems like advertising in the Superbowl is a huge gamble. It's not guaranteed sales or anything like that. It's not even guaranteed that people will even remember the ad. I think already established companies are the most likely to benefit from advertising during the Superbowl.For example, the article mentioned Budweiser advertised a new product during the game. People are really familiar with Budweiser and will be intrigued by the new product and decide to go and try it. However, like I said it is a huge gamble to pay four million dollars for a commercial. I think companies would be better off spreading out the money they have for advertising so they can constantly have new ads coming out, not just one ad that plays during the Superbowl that people will eventually forget.
Personally, I can not imagine spending $4 million for a 30 second commercial clip, however I do understand that it depends on the company and its intent. If a company is at the point where they can place an ad in the Super Bowl, I hope they can afford either of the following results...one being the increase in sales and the capacity to meet these new numbers...and second, the possible result that the ad may not increase sales, which could be viewed as a waste of money depending on the company and its goal.
Post a Comment