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

Arthur Bulgrin

Member since July 2001Contact Arthur

  • Senior Consultant Mr
  • Twitter: @artiebulgrin
  • Muttontown New York
  • 11791 USA

A 40-year veteran of media research, Artie retired from ESPN in 2017 after a career that spanned 21 years leading Global Research & Analytics. Artie began his career at Nielsen Media Research (1981-1989) and then joined ABC-TV (1989-1996) before moving to ESPN. Artie has been an vocal industry thought leader and active in many industry organizations including former chair of the ARF and MRC, executive committee member for CIMM, and advisory board member for the Ehrenberg-Bass Marketing Science Institute. He remains an editorial review board member or the JAR. In addition to his work at MediaScience, Artie provides private consulting services in the areas of media and marketing research.

Articles by Arthur All articles by Arthur

Comments by Arthur All comments by Arthur

  • Obit: Pioneering Media Researcher Gale Metzger, Dead At 83 by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/17/2020)

    To say that Gale had a significant influence on my career is an understatement. He was my mentor, my teacher, a role model, a friend, an innovator and just a true gentleman with the highest integrity. He was a great man whose contributions to research and media are profound. I will truly miss him.  

  • Evaluating TV's Enhanced Role In A Full-Funnel Environment by Artie Bulgrin (MediaDailyNews on 11/18/2019)

    Craig, here are some answers to your questions: 1) In terms of observations, I can tell you that the sample sizes we use in our studies exceed the acedemic recommendations for controlled experiments such as these. Furthermore, I should emphasize that these findings are the result of several studies done over time that have consistently replicated results - giving us a high level of confidence in the findings. 2) It is true that real-world scenarios can change conditions. These conclusions are based on what happens when consumers are known to be exposed to different categories of ads based on varying levels of consumer relevance and in-market status. Across these studies we also tested different conditions including repeated addressable ads and addressable ads within limited interruption formats. Again, the fact that the results have been replicated over time gives us great confidence. 3) We did not test the impact of buffering. 4) Finally, the success of non-targeted ads is probably the most important conclusion. Consumers generally do not ignore ads from non-relevant categories nor do they favor targeted ads from relevant categories.

  • Evaluating TV's Enhanced Role In A Full-Funnel Environment by Artie Bulgrin (MediaDailyNews on 11/18/2019)

    These are good points Ed. There are clearly specific roles for emotonal and rationale messaging through the funnel - to build long-term brand equity with emotion and also to nudge short-term sales with motivation.  Our data is simply telling us that marketers should not assume that addressability based on product relevance is a magic panacea for engagement with TV advertising. Good ads can impact all consumers. So while addressability is a great advancement for efficiency in targeting, marketers should leverage that capability for a balanced approach - including reaching light and non-buyers in the category which are key to growing market share.        

  • More Screens Are Better Than One: ESPN Unveils New Cross-Screen Research At 4As by Steve McClellan (MAD on 03/25/2015)

    Good observation, Ed. The levels of Purchase Intent are high, but regardless of the levels, the important relationships we were observing were the levels across platforms. And the levels were consistently similar across all screens. Overall, ESPN typically reports higher levels of ad performance due to the fact that our audience is inherently selective and so many ads are matched well with the consumer audience. The mix of ads in this test included cars, a beer, an airline, paint, and others. Lab levels can also be higher given the controlled exposure and the intent question administered close to the time of exposure versus day after or longer. But all this is equally distributed. Additionally, tracking research which I shared from outside the Lab (not reported in this article) showed more modest levels for KPI's across a greater variety of ads. In the brand case study I shared, purchase intent levels were over 60%, which reflects the category -- a packaged goods product with a low barrier for consideration. In the end, with validation from lab and field research, we were able to demonstrate that video ads can produce comparable results regardless of the platform... and multiple screens are better than one!

About Edit

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