Nielsen Dominating Upfront Currency, Once Again

by Joe Mandese , April 8, 2025

Following two days of high-level discussions – Monday’s MediaPost Outfront Forum and this morning’s opening session of CIMM East – it’s clear that despite a variety of so-called “alternative currencies” -- the vast majority of advertising deals done in this year’s upfront marketplace will be guaranteed against the same dominant currency as in years past: Nielsen.

“We made that bet last year,” GroupM Executive Director-Research and Value Analytics Nicolas Grand said during the Coalition for Innovative Media Measurement (CIMM) summit this morning, referring to Nielsen’s new Big Day-plus panel measurement service.

“I think it paid off and there is no turning back,” he added.

Speaking for a big network, Fox Senior Vice President-Ad Sales Research & Data Kym Frank characterized this year's upfront market currencies more as a "fiesta" than a "war.

"Maybe it's more like a currency fiesta where we're all invited to the party and some of us are more fun than others," she quipped.

That said, she also acknowledged: "We are primarily a Nielsen shop at Fox. I'd say Nielsen is our first language. We're happy to order a menu in VideoAmp. We're proficient in all of these currencies, but Nielsen is our first language.

Most of the panelists seemed to agree about Nielsen's continuing dominance, but characterized this year's marketplace as being bifurcated with most of the CPM-based audience guarantees being based on age and gender audience demographics from Nielsen's Big Data service, and more nuanced and/or enhanced audience breaks coming from alternative currencies like VideoAmp, iSpot, and Comscore (see related accreditation story).

Toward that end, Dentsu Executive Vice President-Head of Research and Measurement Celeste Castle characterized Nielsen as winning a near-term race, "but it doesn't mean you've won the marathon."

Beyond this year's marketplace, panelists more or less agreed there would be a continuing shakeout as the industry evolves away from historic demographic-based GRP and CPM deals and more toward a nuanced understanding of audiences -- and audience delivery -- in future marketplace scenarios.

"We're just getting started," she said.

If Nielsen has emerged as the near-term gold standard for 2025-26 upfront deals, the panel discussion also suggested that the Media Rating Council (MRC) -- not the U.S. JIC (joint industry committee) remains the standard for third-party assessment on the integrity of any new or preexisting market currencies.

"I applaud the effort the JIC has made, but I think it’s a little too late," Dentsu's Castle said adding: "Right now, I think the MRC is the gold standard. I need that."

ad buys, advertising, alternate currencies, audience measurement, big data, events, fox corp, media buying, media measurement, mpoutfront, nielsen, television

2 comments about "Nielsen Dominating Upfront Currency, Once Again".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, April 8, 2025 at 12:57 p.m.
Joe, the "JIC" never intended to replace Nielsen---or "audience"--as the standard "currency" for buying and selling national TV ad time. The "alternate currencies" were not currencies. They were various metrics designed to be used on a totally selective basis by various sellers in addition to audience" data.

There's no reason why information that provides added insights will no longer be used----but it was never a challenge to Nielsen's "dominance". Whether Nielsen will remain dominant is another question. But to unseat Nielsen you must first prove that what it is reporting is demonstrably in error ---very difficult-----and that you can provide more correct data ---very difficult---and cheaper---maybe---and that you can maintain your service without major snafus and data glitches. To do the latter you must be prepared to co-exist with Nielsen for several years---with the sellers paying for both services---until the sellers are satisfied that you are a viable operation---could be very costly.
Reply

M Cohen from marshall cohen associates, April 8, 2025 at 9:43 p.m.

As Ed intelligently notes in his comment, "To do the latter you must be prepared to co-exist with Nielsen for several years---with the sellers paying for both services---until the sellers are satisfied that you are a viable operation---could be very costly." That's the hard part. You would need to pay Nielsen and Alternative Service B concurrently. Today, who would have the expense budget for that? And that's the ballgame right there.