Search by name, company, title, location, etc.

Jerome Samson

Member since July 2017Contact Jerome

Articles by Jerome All articles by Jerome

  • Could Excessive Ad Frequency Be Good For Your Brand? in MediaDailyNews on 07/13/2017

    Frequency can now be adjusted, based on certain known conditions - balancing cumulative exposure between TV and digital. But the game is still to weigh one against the other to optimize the impact (cognitive, emotional, behavioral) that an ad campaign will have on the target consumer.

Comments by Jerome All comments by Jerome

  • TV Needs Better Forecasting, Maybe Some New 'Currencies': Shimmel by Wayne Friedman (TV Watch on 04/21/2022)

    Panels aren't the bad guys they're made out to be. If one company had TV data for every single person in the country, panels would be moot. But that's not the case. Big data (from MSO, SmartTV, or streaming platforms) is usually narrow: Yes, 30M households is a big number, but it's only one in every four US households. Who knows how the rest of them watch TV. So, two things can happen: big data companies can somehow band together and cover the whole country in all its diversity - in which case a panel will be needed to normalize discrepancies in measurement methods; or big data companies, together, can only cover a portion of the country - in which case a panel will be needed to tell the full story. Either way, like it or not, panels are here to stay.

  • Will Nielsen Kerfuffle Kill The GRP? by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 09/23/2021)

    At the end of the day, GRPs and impressions aren't very different from one another, are they? Neither is any good at disentangling frequency from reach.

  • Video Gaming Poses Growing Competition To Streaming by Karlene Lukovitz (Video Insider on 09/14/2021)

    Karlene - Does Park Associates have 'total time spent' rather than 'ratio of time spent?' I couldn't spot it in their report, but it would be so much more insightful than a ratio. Total streaming time and total gaming time are so different generation by generation.

  • Madison Avenue's New Impressionistic Movement by Joe Mandese (RTBlog on 06/07/2021)

    Thanks for the pointer, Joe! (I'm a Nielsen alum, I'm familiar with the definition of a TV rating ;). Call it 'share' then, and my points are the same. You're calling it 'gross value' and I agree that's what it is. A metric ton of iPhones weighs the same as a metric ton of scrap metal :p

  • Madison Avenue's New Impressionistic Movement by Joe Mandese (RTBlog on 06/07/2021)

    Thanks for the overview, Joe. Mathematically speaking, ratings and impressions are the same thing, so what's the objective here? 1) It helps monetize small audiences that go unreported by Nielsen (or get rounded up to the nearst tenth). But that ignores the fact that those audiences go unreported because they're outside confidence intervals, not because they don't exist. In a panel-based measurement system like Nielsen's, statistics are important. Less so in a comprehensive census-based system, but we don't have one yet. 2) It's an invitation to ignore frequency. Not saying everyone will do it, but if you mean to turn a blind eye to duplicated audience, it's an easier jump from impressions than it is from ratings or shares. Hard to imagine that buyers are very pleased with these moves :p

  • Are National TV Ads Actually Too Cheap? by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 08/23/2018)

    It raises the effective CPM, for sure, but not the contracted CPM: if you're paying $10 for a thousand impressions, and you find out that 500 of those are invalid (for one reason or another), you've indeed effectively paid a $20 CPM. It doesn't mean however that it's fair value for the buy: you've been overcharged. Imagine now that the publisher corrects the problem and fully delivers on the contracted 1,000 impressions: you won't all of a sudden be okay with paying $20 for them, will you? In other words, when the 'fraudulent' impressions disappear, the effective CPM will go down accordingly to match their value (the $10 contracted rate). It's all a bit of semantics of course and we're on the same page - I'm not saying that there isn't considerable waste in digital buys, but the fact that digital publishers are getting away with it doesn't mean that their impressions are worth $20.

  • Are National TV Ads Actually Too Cheap? by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 08/23/2018)

    Thanks, Ed! Really helpful. I know there are viewability and bot considerations of course, but once those are properly addressed they won't really translate into higher CPM, so I think your $7.50 and $9.75 estimates are a good basis for comparison. I'm in agreement with the gist of Dave's article, but the $2.26 to '$10 to $75' comparison seemed a bit of a stretch to me.

  • Are National TV Ads Actually Too Cheap? by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 08/23/2018)

    Hi Ed, could you share with us a CPM number for 100% viewable 15s digital video ads, and what that number is based on? I'm being over dramatic with my note that we should compare to online display ads, I'll admit! But I don't agree that all TV ads are equivalent to branded premium digital video ads. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by branded premium video ads, Dave. To me, those digital ads have an inherent 'premium' targeted component that we're not accounting for on the TV side if we're looking at the whole thing.

  • Are National TV Ads Actually Too Cheap? by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 08/23/2018)

    But wait, Dave - what's the average CPM for online impressions these days? If we're talking about all ad impressions on national television, then shouldn't we look at all ad impressions online? Not just for 'branded premium video ads' or even YouTube pre-rolls, but good ole display ads as well. Otherwise you're pitting the whole 'tonnage' of television against the cream of the crop online, and that's not really a fair fight.

  • Less Really Is More: ARF Finds Six-Second Ads Get More Attention Per Second by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 06/13/2018)

    I'm with Dorothy: would love to see a comparative analysis of 'attention' for 6-sec spots vs. the first 6 seconds of longer spots. If there's still a bump, then it'll be useful to control for product category, pod placement, etc. But if there's no bump, then we might have all the feedback we need.

About Edit

You haven't told us anything about yourself! Surely you've got something to say. Tell us a little something.