It’s been a heavenly summer for lobster lovers in Maine: A warm winter, better conservation efforts and the month-early arrival of the soft-shell season has spawned an almost unprecedented supply of the sweet and sumptuous crustaceans. But it’s also created economic hell for the lobster industry, which has seen prices fall to as little as $1.50 per pound, the lowest in decades, compared with about $4 at this time last year. Regional promotion efforts are in full swing. The Maine Lobster Council, which represents some 4,500 local lobster fishermen, is running a TV spot which shows a man presenting a woman with a bouquet of lobsters, and using them to make hearts in the sand. The governor of Maine has declared August Lobster Month, and there are plans to extend the promotion into fall. And in an effort to “turn lobsters into Lobsteraid,” a group of local inns have even launched a first-ever Lobsterpalooza, a weeklong festival in some of Maine’s prettiest fishing villages. But the glut raises serious concerns, and in the most recent development, the state’s Lobster Advisory Council, made up primarily of lobstermen working with a food industry consultant, voted unanimously to move forward with a proposal for a $3 million marketing effort. Currently, the promotional budget for Maine lobsters, sometimes called “bugs,” is $400,000. The next step, Patrice McCarron, executive director of the Maine Lobstermen’s Association, tells Marketing Daily, is to move the proposal before the state legislature. “It is all very much still a work in progress,” she says, “which would be funded by the lobstermen.” And lobster families are being pounded not just by lower prices, but also by higher costs for boat fuel. “It’s tricky,” she says. “They’ve made less money so it is difficult to invest in the future. But business is marginal, and people are worried about the medium and longer-term. People want to have a profitable fishing industry. And lobstermen are very concerned about what kind of industry they may be able to pass on to their children.” The issue has continued to generate interest, especially after Canadian lobsterman blockaded Maine lobsters. (A deal has now been reached, but besides economics, there’s historically bad blood, with each side proclaiming their lobsters taste better. The Maine Lobster Council is currently touting a blind taste test from the Wall Street Journal, in which the Maine Lobster trounced lobster from Nova Scotia’s Fourchu.) “I think there will be quite a bit of support for the campaign, but it will not be easy,” McCarron says. Historically, though, she points out that locals have rallied ’round the lobster community in tough times. For example, when financial markets crashed back in October 2008, which resulted both in disruptions in the supply change and a decrease in consumer demand, people banded together to support “a somewhat under-the-radar effort to eat lobster for Thanksgiving,” she says. But no one is expecting anything to improve quickly, and lobster prices are predicted to remain low through the year, which means the Maine Lobster brand will have to struggle to keep its high-end cache even at hot-dog like prices. If approved, McCarron says the campaign wouldn’t likely begin until 2014.
Among the explosion of social TV apps from IntoNow to Shazam to Viggle, TV Guide is hardly a new name. The brand dates back to the earliest days of television, decades before the arrival of mobile phones. Still, TV Guide has established itself in the smartphone era through an app launched in 2009, which has had 7 million downloads to date on the iPhone and other platforms. Building on its goal of one-stop-shop for TV listings and content cross-platform, the company launched a revamped version of its app for iOS devices Thursday. Features are geared toward greater personalization and social sharing. The centerpiece of the updated app is the Watchlist, an interactive tool extended from the TVGuide Web site that allows users to customize listings on a single screen by adding favorite shows, sports teams, actors and movies they want to track. The feature will show how to watch preferred content, whether on TV, on-demand, streaming or DVD. People can also share what they are watching via social networks and link directly to streaming services from ABC, Hulu Plus, HBO Go, iTunes and others. The 500,000 people who have already created Watchlists on TVGuide.com will be able to port over their accounts to the new app. Christy Tanner, EVP and general manager of TVGuide.com and TV Guide Mobile, said the focus on giving users a personalized directory stemmed from internal research showing that people need a way to keep up with all the different viewing choices. Among other new features, the app has also added a hot list dubbed "New Tonight Trending," based on social check-in activity about what people are watching, along with Watchlist filters for news and "new tonight." Users can check in to share and discuss what they are watching via the app. When it comes to advertising, Tanner says TV Guide focuses in on “beyond-the-banner” formats. She said the company has already sold 100 sponsorships since last year around check-ins (on TVGuide.com) and will add the ability to sponsor the “Add to Watchlist” button and content channels in the new app as well. By doubling down on discovery and original content, TV Guide wants to set itself apart from the growing pack of social TV apps. “It's really about a bond between fans and the shows they love,” she said. How does that translate into usage? Tanner said the TV Guide app currently has 1.5 million active users who spend 15 minutes on average each month using it. The company also says its 7 million downloads puts it ahead of other TV apps, including HBO Go, Xfinity, and GetGlue, based on various data sources. As far as ratings, the TVGuide app has earned three out of five stars in the iTunes App Store based on input from 35,320 users. That's better than HBO Go and Xfinity, for example, but not as good as four-star rated GetGlue. The new TV Guide app for Android devices will roll out this fall.
TV stations' newscasts reach key voters better than national cable news networks -- at least according to one TV trade association.Local TV early and late TV news programs in the top 10 markets have 32% of its viewership coming from the core "voting" demographic -- those 35-54 -- per the TVB, the TV and local media advertising trade group, with analysis from Nielsen.By contrast, that demographic is underrepresented by prime-time cable news networks -- just 22%. The TVB says the top 10 markets' prime-time TV newscasts generally mirror the U.S. population as a whole. Those 35-54 are 39% of all voters.The group says within the TV markets of the key battleground states, local broadcast news delivered 28% of the 35-54 voting demo.Cable news networks -- CNN, CNBC, Fox News, HLN and MSNBC -- do generally better with voters 65 years and older -- where are 50% of its prime-time viewers. But those over 65 are a smaller group than younger 35-54 voters, representing 19% of all U.S. voters.By contrast, top 10 TV markets hit 31% of these viewers. Within key battleground states, local broadcast hit 38% of these key voters. Both local TV and cable news networks underrepresent younger voters 18-34, who comprise 24% of voters. Local TV news in the top 10 markets reaches 9% of these voters and cable news networks reach 3%. Within key battleground states, local broadcast hit 9% of these voters. Image by Shutterstock
Looking to refocus its brand, Hallmark Channel will debut a new tagline, its first in three years.The line, "The Heart of TV" celebrates the 11-year-old network's core values, which are "life-affirming, celebratory and quality programming that families come together to watch again and again," stated Susanne McAvoy, executive vice president of marketing and creative services for Crown Media Family Networks, parent company of the Hallmark ChannelShe says the new tag captures the essence of what Hallmark Channel does best: "heartfelt, aspirational programming that evokes a wide range of emotions and responses."In 2008, Hallmark used the tagline "Make Yourself at Home."The older-skewing independent network group launches the effort on-air on October 1, with sneak peeks on social media beginning Sept. 17. Hallmark says the brand's redesign will work with new originally scripted shows, which will also launch around the same time.On October 1, Hallmark will debut a new block of daytime programming, consisting of “Marie," a daily one-hour talk show hosted by Marie Osmond. Also, there will be “Home & Family,” a two-hour program hosted by Mark Steines and Paige Davis.The Hallmark logo won't be changing -- it will remain with its script font style, similar to one its Hallmark Cards sister company uses. Hallmark says the new tagline will come to life on screen with a new style and colors.
Lindt & Sprungli USA is introducing a second ad for Lindor truffles starring Lindt’s global brand ambassador, world tennis champion Roger Federer. The 30-second spot debuted Aug. 23 on YouTube (the video link is also featured on the brand’s Facebook page), and will begin airing on ABC, CBS, NBC and cable/syndicates on the morning of Sept. 3. The first tongue-in-cheek ad (“Airport,” from 2010) conveyed the irresistibility of Lindor truffles (and Federer) by showing female airport security guards confiscating his bag filled with the chocolates and threatening to strip-search the tennis star just for the fun of it. The new 30-second spot, “Lost” -- also from Gotham Inc. -- picks up the story where “Airport” left off. This time, two female airline customer service reps refuse to admit that a clearly ID-ed, “lost” bag full of the truffles is Federer’s (apparently planning to keep the goodies for themselves). In conjunction with the new creative, Lindt and Federer are hosting a “Perfect Match” sweepstakes on the brand’s Facebook page. Through Sept. 9, fans can enter to win a grand prize trip to the Sony Ericsson Open in March, Federer-autographed items, and a variety of Lindor products. Lindt is also releasing a limited-edition Roger Federer Lindor Tennis Tube, filled with the truffles, available while supplies last at the Lindt Chocolate Shops in New York City’s Rolex Building and the Peninsula Hotel (suggested retail: $22).
Some 18 percent of consumers worldwide are accessing online video through their TV sets on a daily basis, while 25 percent access online video content several times a week, according to a new study from NPD Group. “The Connected TV Study: Features, Content and Usage” report, which surveyed 14,000 consumers across 14 countries, looks at how consumers view online video content, how often, what devices are used for viewing online video content, and how frequently they watch online video from over-the-top providers like Netflix and Hulu, in different countries. The study says the rise in online video watching on TVs has to do with more sources deploying online video content through televisions. Sure, people are buying Internet-enabled televisions, but they are also connecting with online video content via video game consoles and set-top boxes from pay-TV providers that have broadband-enabled services. Online video consumption on TVs varies by country. For example, in urban parts of China, nearly 40 percent of users watch online video on their televisions. In Mexico, the number is 30 percent. What are they watching mostly? NPD says films are the most popular online video on TVs, overtaking TV content. The study also finds, not surprisingly, that tablets and smartphones are seeing greater usage for online video, although overall usage is still less than that of laptops and desktop computers, with 52 percent watching video on laptops and 73 percent watching on desktop PCs. In terms of online video consumption in different countries by device, China -- particularly urban China -- stands out, consuming more online video content than every other country across every device.
Social TV -- in all it’s forms -- is on a roll. More apps, more cross-platform promotion and apparently, more engagement. This USA TouchPoints analysis looks at what share of TV viewing is concurrent with social media use and vice versa.With TV still far and away the dominant medium in terms of the time the general population spends with it, the small slice of total TV time that accounts for concurrent use of social media isn't a surprise. Despite the increased activity in and excitement around the space, Social TV is still small, though rapidly growing, in the larger picture of TV consumption. (This 2% slice is not solely constrained to social activity that relates to onscreen TV content; it encompasses all use of social.)However, when looking at the question from the other end of the telescope, we see that the share of social media time that is spent concurrently viewing TV, the picture is very different: The share is 15-times larger at 30%. In part, this is because of the relative total volume of time compared to TV. But it is also likely to be due to the social currency that TV provides for interaction between friends, as well as the efforts of broadcasters and content owners to increasingly promote viewer interaction across social platforms.While a superficial view of this data may suggest that TV benefits social more than social benefits TV, such a conclusion would be simplistic. The benefits are inevitably flowing both ways. The slice of TV viewing that is concurrent with social media use is only likely to grow in the future, as the sector crystalizes the underlying models and consumer behavior continues to evolve.
In the wake of Dish's AutoHop technology comes an Apple patent that could mean "ad skipping" to some. But read closely. Seems the new technology would allow users of digital entertainment to automatically switch to another digital device or file when a bit of advertising appears. Say you’re on the Pandora music app, but not a paying customer -- just one of those people who use it like a radio, where music comes with advertising. But you really don't want to listen to that advertising. So the app automatically switches you to a bit of other audio or video instead. While interesting, the Apple patent isn't that all different from manual behavior that digitally minded people might already be using. Waiting for some content from Discovery's "Shark Week," you also have to wait impatiently for pre-roll spot to run its course. So at this time, you may already be looking at your emails or shooting a quick text to one of your friends on your smartphone. Like Dish Network's aim with its new Hopper DVR, the Apple app would allow consumers to do what they want to do more efficiently – that is, avoid advertising and messaging. Technically, the patent doesn't use words like "commercial avoidance" or "advertising skipping." Instead, according to Cnet, it is described as "seamlessly switching media playback between a media broadcast, such as a radio broadcast, and media from a local media library." Seamless switching occurs when the respective device "determines that an upcoming media item in a media broadcast is not of interest to a user." Not of interest. We know what that means. Of course, perhaps you could also set the device to avoid any content containing Tom Cruise stomping couches, cats chasing dogs, "Jackass"-themed videos, or wild car chases/crashes through city highway tunnels featuring Rosie O'Donnell. In other words, Apple could help viewers switch from programming to commercials. Like any good technology-minded company, Apple can see many sides. In theory, at least.
You’d better get ready: TV media-buying processes, protocols and parameters are coming to the Web. Lately, the trades have been full of stories about the long-awaited convergence between ads on the Web and ads on television. For example, like TV, we’ve seen both Nielsen and comScore launch GRP (gross rating point)-defined measurements and reports for online ad campaigns. We’ve seen the bridging of online and offline media behaviors with the recent launch of Nielsen Online Audience Segments, which enable Web video ad companies like Microsoft, Adap.TV, Collective, Undertone and Videology to target online audiences according to their “look-alike” TV viewing behaviors. And, just like TV, we’ve seen more and more agencies limit their payments to Web video companies only to the verified delivery of “in-demo” audiences they are able to deliver in their campaigns. Multiplatform advertising is finally arriving -- albeit in fits and starts, linked across platforms more like a paper cup and string telephone than the locked-down digital linkage we’ll certainly have within a few years. However, as we bring together campaigns running on different media, we find that technology is not the only thing we need to integrate. We need to knit together some very different and, sometimes contradictory, business practices as well. The online world is all about directly measured ad impressions. TV is about panel projections and buying shows and ratings -- not really impressions the way online folks use them. The online world has embraced and exploited audience-based campaigns to an extraordinary level. The TV world is still having problems getting past fundamental, almost prehistoric sex/age demographic targeting. The online world values campaign and impressions according to return-on-investment. The TV world focuses much more on scarcity. The differences aren't just limited to key buying metrics and approaches. Both online and TV operate under rules that, in many cases, don’t translate well from one platform to the other. Take the overnight daypart in TV. In the days of test patterns, four analog channels and rabbit ears -- when most of TV advertising’s rules were written -- any television programming airing after midnight was typically of very poor quality and frequently served only to help old folks deal with insomnia. Today, in a multi-hundred channel TV world, overnight viewers are more likely to be folks who work “swing shifts” or students watching a History Channel documentary and browsing online news sites at the same time. As TV-centric brand advertisers spend their money online, will they impose the same “no overnight” rules that they impose on their TV ads, under the assumption that anyone online after midnight is either watching porn or playing casuals games? Should they even be imposing the same no overnight rules on TV anymore,either? After all, increasingly, folks are using DRVs to record late-night shows to watch at a more convenient time. Many of the premium channels use the midnight to 6 a.m. hours to post reruns of this week's popular series – assuming, I suspect, such shows will be recorded. It’s hard to change well-established assumptions. Look at how slowly traditional media adapted to the Internet and mobile age. In our 24/7, always-on world of multiple platforms, it will be interesting to see if brands will see the overnight hours as the traditional dead zone, or as an emerging opportunity. What do you think will happen?
The Carly Rae Jepsen music video "Call Me Maybe" gets seen 212 million times on the Internet. What is that worth in TV terms? When 100 million viewers watch a three-hour event called the Super Bowl, it can bring a network $210 million to $225 million in national advertising dollars. But the Jepsen music video runs just under three minutes. One can't squeeze in some 60-odd 30-second commercials -- or 30 minutes of total commercial time. We are left to wonder what a screen is worth in 2012 versus, say, 2000. If a screen is a screen, maybe certain big music videos would seem to be worth perhaps $7 million – or two 30-second commercials attached to the video. What about unique visitors? Justin Bieber has some 15 million Twitter followers. Is that worth $200 million? $20 million? $2 million? Increasingly the value of the screen seems to follow that of where flowing water ends up: It seeks its own level. Press reports point to big Internet video consumption, especially for key original, out-of-the-box videos. Jepsen's video has some big, big numbers. But the value is again up in the air. We are left to wonder what real marketers would pay to access this. Now think about this: YouTube versus radio. The New York Times says that when “Call Me Maybe” was getting tens of millions of views on YouTube during March and April, it still had relatively low radio play -- fewer than 5,000 spins a week on Top 40 stations in the U.S., according to Nielsen. Is that a missed opportunity on real monetization -- or are we left to wonder if all this continues to be a marketing tool for what remains the real dollars in the music world -- the concert tour? If we look forward, perhaps we can focus on traditional TV programs also becoming a true marketing tool. Look for the mall-stage version of "Modern Family" coming to a town near you.
Mike Bloxham, marketing chief of the Media Behavior Institute, just shed a startling stat with the Social Media Insider Summit crowd in Tahoe. Drawing on MBI’s USA Touchpoints analysis of how people really use media – including their concurrent usage of mediums – Bloxham pointed out that for all the talk about “social TV,” you know people using social media while watching television. It’s actually a “teeny weeny” slice of total time spent watching television: 2%. “That’s amazing,” Bloxham exclaimed, adding, however, that if you look at the “other end of the telescope” – the time people spend using social media in while they are watching television, it’s actually pretty significant: 30%. Based on this finding, I’m going to suggest we change the industry buzz term “social TV” to “TV social.” Or something better than that, if you’ve got any suggestions.