Bowdon Media - Whitepaper

Video as a Sales Tool: Ad Rate Evidence

Advertisers Vote with their Wallets: Video Has More Impact

In the highly competitive world of advertising and media planning, there’s no such thing as charity. Planners use sophisticated demographics, focus groups and response measurements to collect feedback on campaigns.

With that mind, it’s telling to see how the industry values video messages delivered to a potential customer, versus a traditional image & text internet ad. The conclusion is simple: Video has more impact on an individual viewer than words and pictures.

Ad Rates

Ordinary websites are charging an average of $10 to place graphic & text advertisements in front of a thousand pairs of eyes. The very best websites can charge $30 for those impressions. Still, video and sound deliver so much more impact that television networks can charge an average of $64 to run an advertisement in front of the same number of eyeballs.

It's more evidence that video can demonstrate and create a feeling for viewers in a way static pictures and text just can't.

This data comes from a keynote speech for the ad:tech conference, April 2006, delivered by Mark Kvamme, partner at Sequoia Capital. Reference: http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/9279.asp

Oh, and one other thing.

Internet ads are often frequently tied to specific search terms and niche websites that can highly target a user's interests. TV ads are generally less targetable. So when we see that a single TV impression is valued more, keep in mind this is in spite of TV's weaker ability to target a potential consumer.

VFRs, on the other hand, offer the best of both worlds: high targetability and the video connection.