exchange4media had earlier reported that some constituents of the broadcast industry are of the opinion that Live events data should not be reported till the event gets over, which means IPL data will be out only after the entire tournament ends.
Media planners have considered the above option to be unviable. A Senior VP of a media agency from Mumbai stated, “The option is unviable in three scenarios. First, the measurement of real-time events is not possible if the rating comes post the event. If advertisers have invested a huge chunk of the money, how would they measure the RoI? At some stage, one needs to know the viability of the money spent. If the rating is rightly timed, an advertiser can take a decision whether to keep going or not. In the above scenario of post event ratings, money once invested is gone. Secondly, when broadcasters charge a premium for the inventory in the final and semi-final matches in the tournament, how would they justify the enhanced viewership? When the event is over, how would the viewership of one time be measured? Thirdly, from my perspective it would be difficult to estimate the following year’s events of a particular event. For example, how would I measure IPL 2014 estimates if ratings are received post IPL?”
Industry experts we spoke to added that post event ratings would not only make the measurement mechanism tedious but would also make it difficult for planners.
A COO of a media agency in Delhi, on condition of anonymity, shared, “This is not advisable. My fundamental curiosity is that why would one propose such a thing. We have to move towards real-time data. As smartphone penetration increase in the country and with just a flash of button-likes, one is able to measure the likability of the video in hours, all the measurement metrics data would move towards real-time. With the evangelisation of technology, real-time will replace the other forms of data. This is standard practice all over the world. Content provider needs to understand that proposing ‘juggad’ techniques won’t help. In real-time data advertiser can quickly correct and rectify the extent of money to be spent. In the above case of post event ratings, the money spend would become a one-way entry. We have to be democratic with investments. Although I understand the agony of broadcasters, but I advise them to stand on practicality and rationality.”
Sandipan Ghosh, AVP – Marketing, Ruchi Soya Industries said, “When one invests money on a broadcasting property, it depends upon the performance of the programme. Or else it depends upon the heritage and strength of the legacy the content has established in the past. In this case of post event ratings, I would be confined to only do a post mortem of the data available. Hence, this is not at all a viable option. Secondly, if broadcasters are willing to go ahead with the ratings of such kind, they should lock the prices of the tournament. No premium should be charged on last matches or the final matches, as justifying viewership in real-time is not an option here.”
“In any case what kind of measurement will I put into in such a scenario? For a better assessment of RoI, shouldn’t a broadcaster pay penalty if he is not able to deliver the numbers? What broadcasters are trying to do in this post event ratings is asking advertisers to hedge. Criteria should be defined and the mechanism has to be even. We cannot make rating uneven like this,” added Ghosh.
Industry experts cite that the advertiser fraternity only wants to settle on real-time data. Till the ratings mechanism does emerge substantially strong, the fraternity suggests that broadcasters should at least be close to the real-time data.
According to highly placed sources, a solution is likely to be reached between the stakeholders this week.