Better Ad Effectiveness For Roku's OTT, IPG Study Finds

A survey conducted by Magna, IPG Media Lab and Roku says that for a select group of advertisers, Roku’s OTT platform can be more effective than linear TV.

Four IPG clients -- Applebee’s, H&M, McCormick and Truvia -- participated in the research. Roku said the video ads on its OTT platform were 67% more effective per exposure than linear TV ads.

Media investment strategy group Magna surveyed 4,621 consumers, including those exposed to the ads and an unexposed control group. Magna and IPG Media Lab are part of the agency holding company Interpublic Group.

The brands were tracked and measured, with the Roku platform used to identify households with exposure to linear TV and/or OTT ads. The survey consisted of traditional brand metrics such as ad recall, brand favorability and purchase intent.



In addition, Roku says the OTT flights for these marketers -- instead of using linear TV -- meant a 32% increase per exposure in perception that a brand has a unique story to tell. 

The ads on the OTT platform required less exposure than linear TV. For example, to drive comparable brand lift, advertisers would need 10 linear TV exposures, seven Roku exposures, or 6.5 exposures on Roku and linear TV together.

While realizing there is strong overall viewing growth for OTT platforms, media-buying agency executives remain concerned that the lack of Nielsen-like OTT measurement may hold back marketers from buying in.

For its new “Cflight” initiative, which offers a simple audience guarantee for all screens, NBCUniversal says it will include co-viewing measured on OTT platforms “where measurement is enabled,” including Roku and NBCUniversal content on Hulu.

NBCU says OTT represents more than one third of NBCUniversal’s long-form digital video audience.

1 comment about "Better Ad Effectiveness For Roku's OTT, IPG Study Finds".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, April 25, 2018 at 5:50 p.m.

    Interesting, Wayne,  especially the finding that it takes ten "linear TV" exposures to equal seven OTT exposures in "brand lift". Did they include any information about the relative cost of an "exposure" on "linear TV' versus OTT? For example, if the OTT CPM is 50% higher than "linear, then the OTT advantage in generating  "brand lift"  is costlier and the efficiency calculation would actually favor "linear TV. On the other hand, if an exposure via OTT only cost the brands involved, 20% more then the advantage shifts back to OTT.

Next story loading loading..