• by Linda Thomas Brooks , June 9, 2015

In my hockey-obsessed household, the Stanley Cup final games are moments of true family togetherness. My youngest son even gets grace on his usual school-night bedtime to be able to watch some of the action.  So far in the series, the games have been tough, fast-moving and very close. Our viewing experience includes a lot of yelling, leaping off the couch, and even questioning what appears to be some missed penalty calls.

For me, however, the pace of the game hasn’t been the only thing making my heart race. I’m a hockey fan by night but a marketing and media person around the clock — I look at the advertising with an eye toward the return on the advertising investment. 

Throughout the entire hockey season, the commercial breaks have been glaring examples of the failure to put all the pieces of the marketing puzzle together.

I absolutely believe that many sports, including hockey, provide a valuable audience for marketers in many categories. The hockey audience’s affluence, youth compared to every major sport other than the NBA, and significant female skew (generally around 40%) makes it a powerful place for advertisers. 

Major marketers sponsoring the game got strong recommendations from their media agencies on the relevance for their particular targets, and media agencies brokered great deals for the placement.  And I’m equally sure the creative agencies did their part to tailor creative for the hockey audience and creating a compelling message.

So what went wrong? 

Those best-in-class silos weren’t synced to understand how the context and the content work together.  A complete picture of the number of spots airing, the length of time between the breaks and the viewing dynamics of the game is needed to maximize this advertising investment. 

The current result is that viewers saw the same commercial units over and over again.  In some cases, sponsors have been running the same handful of creative units not just in the playoffs, not even across this season, but going back to last season too. 

Earlier this season, I had the experience of watching an NHL game in the lobby of an ice arena, as parents waited to see their kids play a game. One of those commercials came on and a dad standing nearby heard the squeal “you’re real?” from the TV and responded out loud: “They must not think we’re real or they wouldn’t keep showing us the same *&%^ commercial!”

Calibrating wear-out from a commercial message is admittedly a complicated science. 

Data is readily available, however, to show viewing duration and the propensity to see multiple messages.  The networks would do themselves and their viewers a huge service by helping advertisers understand these dynamics.  Right now, there is negative incentive to view through the commercial pods.  Even a spot that scores high on humor and likability---I’m looking at you Neil Patrick Harris with your “I’m not paying for it” Heineken message—ceases to be amusing after too many same-game repetitions.

Marketers who aren’t in hockey aren’t off the hook. The same dynamic has been playing out in other sports, too.  College football games during the past season provided textbook examples of commercial wear-out.  Any event that has multi-unit advertising sponsorships needs careful consideration of these dynamics.

Every advertiser is looking for ROI improvements.  Best-in-class experts are optimizing media and testing creative.  There is incredible value between the silos, however, that is being left on the table.  A hybrid approach that connects the strategy, execution and data across the disciplines is desperately needed.