Testing radio and TV as marketing vehicles; radio is less costly means to test copy concepts that can be applied to a TV commercial

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, August, 1988 by Michael Garry

Testing radio and TV as marketing vehicles

New York City--Many publishers still have considerable apprehension about the cost and risk involved in using broadcast media to promote their publications and attract subscribers. However, by carefully testing radio and television promotion, publishers may discover that broadcast is a cost-effective direct marketing vehicle.

The ins and outs of testing broadcast were delineated at a Direct Marketing Day seminar that was led by Shan Ellentuck and James Springer, codirectors of Ellentuck & Springer, a direct response agency specializing in broadcast.

Ellentuck advised attendees to consider first whether they have sufficiently good reasons to use broadcast media for direct marketing. Among those reasons she cited having an elusive target market that is difficult to reach entirely with direct mail; finding that your traditional lists have become marginally effective; needing to head off a competitor who has been using broadcast; and wanting to develop broad public awareness of a new magazine.

Publishers might consider entering TV by way of radio, which is much less expensive. "You can test copy concepts in radio that can e applied very directly to the development of a TV commercial," noted Springer. Radio is also more targeted than TV and attracts audiences that have a high degree of station loyalty; on the other hand, TV audiences are larger and more attentive than radio audiences.

Setting up the test

In doing a direct marketing test of broadcast media, publishers should attempt to answer the following questions, Ellentuck and Springer suggested.

* Will there be market acceptance of the magazine?

* What is the best creative appeal? Ellentuck said she usually tests three to six different commercials on radio before settling on the best one. The appeal made in broadcast media is essentially the same as the direct mail appeal, stressing benefits, making an offer and closing the sale.

* What is the best offer? Whereas direct mail offers can be somewhat complex, it is best to keep an offer made on TV or radio simple.

* How and where will the commercial work best? This involves considerations of the programming, stations, audience, time of day, time of year and location.

* How many orders should be generated in order to evaluate the test? How many stations, markets, spts per stations are necessary?

Springer described three kinds of tests that are commonly used in the broadcast area: the flip-flop test, which compares two different commercials run on alternate weeks or months on the same station; the paired market test, which compares tests in two cities to determine how similar the markets are; and the sandwich test, in which a test commercial is run within an ongoing successful campaign.

Budgeting for broadcast

The production cost of a radio commercial ranges from zero (simply providing material to be read on the air) to about $2,000 for a full-blown commercial with music. Airtime costs $3,000 to $5,000 for testing. But Ellentuck recommends spending $10,000 to $20,000 for a long-term test that will allow the publisher to generate more volume and to measure pay-up.

The production of a TV commercial costs at least $20,000, although it is possible to spend as little as $10,000; most cost between $30,000 and $50,000. TV airtime runs about $20,000 for a test, although spending between $35,000 and $45,000 may be required to assess geographical or seasonal differences. Ellentuck advises computing expense on a cost-per-unit-sold basis.

One key advantage of the broadcast media test is that, if it is not working, a publisher can simply end it and cut the losses.

In evaluating a TV or radio test, publishers can apply many of the principles used to analyze a direct mail test, said Springer. But he stressed that there are still important differences. The most significant one is that TV involves many more variables than does direct mail--mainly the variety of programming and audiences. As a result, "more judgment is required in making a final determination of the results of a broadcast test than might be required in some direct mail tests because the numbers [in direct mail] are more reliable and predictable."

Ensuring reliability

The unpredictability of broadcast means that publishers will have to make repeated tests to ensure that they have reliable data. "If you've found something, don't lock it up and say, 'Now I know this forever,'" Springer said. "Go back and flip-flop the test, roll it out to a larger group of stations and see if the results hold up." On the other hand, Ellentuck said, don't give up on broadcast prematurely if things don't seem to be going well; she suggested looking at different time slots and assessing whether the back-end response may justify up-front costs.