TV Advertising Viewing

8/10/2019 TV Advertising Viewing

1/121

1

Copyright 2012 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

IAB Online Video Study


A Comprehensive Picture of

Digital Video and TV Advertising:Viewing, Budget Share Shift

and Effectiveness


2/121


3/121

3



Executive Summary

Younger TV viewers, the coveted 18-34 demo, continue to grow their time spent withonline video.

Viewing Patterns and Implications (continued)

Implications for the future of digital video and TV, both imminent and longer term, include

better opportunities to:

Deploy digital media to buy video ad schedules targeting the hardest to reachaudiences(light TV, male and younger viewers)

Optimize video viewing through new content genres and formats that can travel across

screens Change how narratives are built and sequenced, altering content windows, distribution

and consumption


4/121

4



Executive Summary

Share Shift: TV Ad Schedules and What Happens When Dollars AreReallocated to Digital

To benchmark how moving dollars from TV ad budgets to digital media*

affects reach and costs, the study examined 18 real TV schedules across keyadvertiser verticals. Categories include CPG (specifically HBA, Food, andBeverage), Technology, Automotive, Retail, Finance and Telecom. Analyseswere done on aggregated schedules for CPG and also for the non CPGverticals.

The schedule reallocations provide reach for the TV only schedules, as well asmovement of 5%, 10% and 15% of budget, respectively to digital media.

Non CPG TV only schedules reach was 48.5% P18+ and CPG TV onlyschedules reach was 61.2% P18+, directionally in keeping with how adschedules in those verticals usually compare for TV

* Digital media includes video, rich media and other display formats.


5/121

5



Executive Summary


Across the 18 schedules in the study, budget shifts resulted in incremental

reach for the same spend. The average increase in P18+ reach at areallocation of 15% of budget was 4.2% or 4.2 reach points.

Non CPG schedules averaged incremental P18+ reach of 6.2% (or 6.2 reachpoints) at a reallocation of 15% of budget.

And on average, CPG P18+ reach grew 3.4% (3.4 reach points) when 15% ofdollars moved into digital.

Across verticals, the 15% share shift results in more reach at lower costs perpoint, dropping from an average of $67.6K to $63.0K. Corresponding CPMsgo from $13.82 to $12.31


6/121

6



Executive Summary


For the reallocated schedules, the portion of reach points that is duplicated acrossboth web and TV or the cross platform piece is greater than the new online only

reach points. For example, the TV only CPG schedules started at 61.2% P18+ reach and

with 15% of budget shifted grew to 64.6% P18+ reach distributed as follows:6.6% online only, 17% online + TV and 41% TV only.

Similarly, for non CPG schedules at 15% reallocation of budgets, the TV only

schedule grows from 48.5% to 54.7% P18+ reach with 31.4 reach points inTV, 13.3 reach points online + TV and 10 reach points in online only

The duplicated or online + TV reach is shown to be more effective on keybrand effect metrics than either platform alone.

The sequence of exposure matters: prior exposure to an ad online enhancesthe impact of the TV exposure.


7/121

7



Executive Summary

Implications of Reallocated Schedules and Cross PlatformDuplication and Ad Effectivity

In an increasingly digital world, the value of duplicated, as a function ofdiverse ad experiences, is likely to increase

Frequency across TV and digital by target audience and within ad verticalneed to be examined to optimize TV and digital platform schedules.

Planning and running online video first can boost how well both the online

video and TV portions of a campaign work.


8/121

8



Executive SummaryVideo Brand Ad Effectiveness

Online video ads score higher impact than TV ads on Nielsen measured metrics. Metrics aregeneral recall, brand recall, message recall and ad likeability.

Greatest differentials on all metrics occur for video ads in full episode players compared to TV,both broadcast and cable. For example, message recall at 40% is double that of TV at 20%.General recall is 64% (vs. 46% on TV), Brand recall is 50% (vs. 27% on TV) and Ad Likeabilityis 28% (vs. 17% on TV).

Sequencing Matters. Prior exposure to online ads improves ad impact of TV ads by doubledigits. This is true across ad formats: Short Form, Full Episode or Display (Non-Video) Ads.Over half recall the ad, roughly one-third recall the brand or message and 20% like the adsonline vs. TV.

Ads are more effective online whether they are later duplicated on TV or as standalone onlineads. Full Episodes are the most effective, outperforming TV across metrics, demos, contentgenres and Ad Verticals. Short form videos are often, but not always, more effective than TVads.

Superior performance on ad effectiveness for ads in short form online video is evident but themargins relative to TV narrow.

Highest impact content for ads in full episode players are Documentary/tribute, SciFi, Talk,Drama/Adventure, Animation, all at 64% or more general ad recall.

Highest impact for ads in full episodes online are in the following Ad Verticals: Finance, Retail,Restaurants, Hospitality and Pharma.


9/121

9



Executive Summary

Ad Receptivity

On average, people streaming video watch ads for 20 seconds andaverage a completion rate of 87%

Regardless of content, short or long form, mid roll ads enjoy thehighest completion rates, 99% in short form and 89% in long form.

Pre roll placements in short form ads average 79% completion ratesand in long form 81%.

Post roll placements in short form content average 71% completionrates and 79% in long form.


10/121

10



Data Sources

Custom analysis of a wide range of Nielsen mediaresearch products:

Nielsen Cross Platform Homes Single Source Panel Nielsen VideoCensus Streaming Audience Measurement from Nielsen

NetView Panel

TV/Internet Fusion Data

Video Brand Effect Survey Data

Video Analytics Census Data

See appendix for overviews of each dataset methodology


11/121

11



Background:Online Video Definitions Long form online video Any online video that, in its total, is longerthan 24 minutes in length, or

a site where the majority of the content is longerthan 24 minutes in length. (Includes all TV networksites and full episodes).

Short form onl ine video Any online video that, in its total, is shorterthan 24 minutes in length, ora site where the majority of the content is shorterthan 24 minutes in length.

Professionally produced content Any online video content that was produced in a professionalor studio environment.

User generated content (UGC) Any online video content that was produced by an individual user

in a non-professional context.

FEPs Full episode player (FEP) features an episode of a show that previously aired on television(example: Hulu)

Short Form Brand Effect VideoAll other online video formats except for the full episode player

(example: Movie trailer)

Survey Period Jan 2011 March 2012. Q1 2012 used for year over year comparisons

Note: Detailed Methodology slides are located in Appendix


12/121

12




Online Video Usage Landscape:

Digital Video is Growing

C t St t f TV


13/121

13



Current State of TV:Viewing is Flat

% Change12/11- 12/12

+2%

Nielsen Media Research (Syndicated Measurement)

Measurement Period: Dec. 2011- Dec. 2012Nielsen, PUT, Total Day

Dec. 11 Dec. 12, Live+SD US PUT%

C t St t f Di it l Vid


14/121

14



Current State of Digital Video:Streamers Watch More Online Video for Longer

% Change12/11- 12/12

+49%

Measurement Period: Nov. 2011- Nov. 2012VideoCensus, Total Audience

Nielsen VideoCensus Dec. 11 Dec. 12

+12%

-3%

(7:30 hrs)

(5:04 hrs)


15/121

15



For Online Video Streamers,TV Viewing is Seasonal, but Steady

% ChangeJan 2011-

Mar 2012

A

vg.DailyTune-In

MinutesTVViewedPerMonth

Measurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Sum of Segment Average Minutes Per Tuning/Streaming Day Per PersonNielsen Cross Platform Homes PanelNote: Home Only Usage

Among Cross-Platform Homes Panel, A18+

Custom Analysis

(8 hrs)

(7 hrs)

(6 hrs)

(5 hrs)

(4 hrs)

TV Viewing by Online Video Streamers

YoY Change: +3% -2% -1%

-5%


16/121

Lightest TV Viewers are Watching


17/121

17



Lightest TV Viewers are WatchingEven More Online Video

MinutesS

treamedPerM

onth

Measurement Period: March 2011-March 2012Segment Average Minutes Per Tuning/Streaming Day Per PersonNielsen Cross Platform Homes PanelNote: Home Only Usage

+42%Growth

3/11

-3/12

+30%Growth

3/11

-3/12

Min.

Min.

Min.

Min.

Lightest TV Viewers Stream TWICE as Much as Heavy TV Viewers

(Top 20% of Viewers) (Bottom 20% of Viewers)

Avg. Monthly Time Spent Streaming Video per TV Viewer

8 hrs

7 hrs

6 hrs

5 hrs

4 hrs

3 hrs

2 hrs

1 hr

Di it l Vid Vi i i Al G i


18/121

18



Digital Video Viewing is Also GrowingAmong TV Viewers 18-34

% ChangeJan 2011-

Mar 2012

Avg.

MinutesStreamedperUsageDayp

erMonthperTVViewer


Among Cross-Platform Homes Panel, A18-34

TV Viewing by Online Video Streamers

YoY Change: +11% -3% +5%

+4%


19/121


20/121

20




Digital Share-Shift:

Incremental Reach with Digital

Sh Shift R ll ti f B d t


21/121

21



Share Shift: Reallocation of Budgetsfrom TV-Only Schedules to Digital Media

Examined 18 different studies of real schedules* that ran on TV acrosscategories

Compared Reach when 5%, 10% or 15% of budget is shifted to Digital**

Further comparison of CPG break out to Non-CPG categories

100%

TV

Reach?

95%

TV

90%

TV

85%

TV5%Online

10%Online

15%Online

Total of 18 studies across the following categories: Food, Health & Beauty, Beverage, Technology, Auto,Retail, Finance, Telecom. CPG break out includes aggregate of Food, Health & Beauty, and Beverages.

*Digital media includes digital video and display. **TV ad schedules came from a variety of verticals

All advertiser studiesMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create norms across all categoriesNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

Shifting 15% of Media Spend to Digital Results in a


22/121

22



Reach%


Shifting 15% of Media Spend to Digital Results in a4% Increase in Advertiser Reach Across Verticals

IncrementalReach for

Same Spend

100

%TVReach

95%

TV

90%

TV5%Online

10%Online

15%Online

57.6 60.1 61.2 61.8+2.5% Reach +3.6% Reach +4.2% Reach

85%

TV

% of TV Budget Shifted to Digital*, Across Verticals

*Digital media includes digital video and display.

CPG Advertisers Were Able to Reach 17% of Their


23/121

23



Audience on Both Platforms by Shifting 15% of Spendto Digital

Reach%

61.2 63.264.1 64.6

CPG Advertiser studies onlyMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create norms across all categoriesNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

CPGAdvertisers

Only

Incremental

Reach for

Same Spend

+2% Reach +2.9% Reach +3.4% Reach

% of TV Budget Shifted to Online, CPG Advertisers

*Online includes digital video and display ads.

Non CPG Advertisers Can Increase Their Reach 6%


24/121

24



Non-CPG Advertisers Can Increase Their Reach 6%By Shifting 15% Of Media Spend to Digital Properties

Reach%

48.5 52.553.9 54.7

NonCPG

Advertisers

Only

Non-CPG Advertiser studies onlyMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create norms across all categoriesNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

Incremental

Reach for

Same Spend

+4% Reach +5.4% Reach +6.2% Reach

% of TV Budget Shifted to Online, Non-CPG Ads


Summary: Shifting Up to 15% of Ad Spend to


25/121

25



Summary: Shifting Up to 15% of Ad Spend toOnline Provides Incremental and Effective Reach

Measurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create norms across all categoriesNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

% of TV Budget Shifted to Online

TV + Online


Reallocating Dollars To Online Builds


26/121

26



Reallocating Dollars To Online BuildsHigher Quality, More Effective Reach at a Lower Cost

Measurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create these normsNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

% Shifted from TV to Digital

% Shifted from TV to Digital

Note: Share shift slides Include video + display

Across

Across


27/121

27




Video Brand Effect and the Digital

Multiplier:Driving Effectiveness With Duplication

Shifting Media Spend to Digital Results in Duplicated


28/121

28



Reach%

All advertiser studies. Measurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Total of 18 studies were aggregated to create norms across all categoriesNote: Simulations done in IMS Campaign RFData Source: TV/Internet Fusion

g p g pReach

Incremental

Reach for

Same Spend

100%

TVReach? 95%

TV

90%

TV5%

Online

10%Online

15%

Online

57.6 60.1 61.2 61.8+2.5% Reach +3.6% Reach +4.2% Reach

85%

TV

% of TV Budget Shifted to Online, Across Verticals

DuplicatedReach

But is Duplicated Reach Effective?

*In Share Shift slides, online includes digital video and display ads.In Brand Effect, digital video and display ads are shown separately.

General Recall of Ads on TV is Improved Through


29/121

29




General Recall, Across Verticals

Duplication Online

Prior Exposure to Ad in Online Formats Improves General Ad Recall on TV

(Banner Ad)

Effectiveness

of Duplicated

Reach


30/121


31/121


32/121

Digital Multiplier Effect: Previous Ad Exposure in


33/121

33



Digital Multiplier Effect: Previous Ad Exposure inShort Form Online Video Improves Effectiveness of TV Ads

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networksNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceTV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad stream; Based on exposures to Short Form Online Video in theprevious 7 daysLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period; specific creative

To Ad in Short-Form Online Video

Prior Exposure to Short Form Online VideoAd M k TV M Eff ti A D


34/121

34



Ads Makes TV More Effective Across Demos

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networks . Primetime, non-sportsNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceOnline & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period; specificcreative executions may vary

Men 18-49Women 18-49

Men 18-34 Women 18-34

49%A18-49Avg TV+

ShortFormVideo

42%Avg. TVA18-49

43%A18-34Avg TV+

ShortFormVideo

39%Avg. TVA18-34

Digital Multiplier Effect: Viewers Who Saw a Banner Ad


35/121

35



g pOnline Before the TV Ad Showed a Lift Over TV Only

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networksNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceTV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad stream; Based on exposures to non video in theprevious 7 daysLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period; specific

To Display Ad

Duplication: Prior Exposure to Display Ads(N Vid O li ) M k TV M Eff ti


36/121

36



(Non-Video Online) Makes TV More Effective



Men 18-34 Women 18-34

50%AvgTV+

DisplayA18-49

43%Avg. TVA18-49

45%AvgTV+

DisplayA18-34

39%Avg. TVA18-34


37/121

37




Video Brand Effect

Digital is More Effective

Online Video Ads Outperform TV Ads on


38/121

38



pAll Measured Effectiveness Metrics

Standard TV Ads include TV ads on both broadcast and cable. Primetime, non-sportsNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the sameperiod; specific creative executions may vary

Like Ads in Short Form (up to 24 Min.)


39/121

39



( p )Online Video Outperform Their TV Counterparts

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networks . Primetime, non-sportsNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceOnline & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period;


40/121

Online Video Ads During Full EpisodesM t Eff ti


41/121

41



are Most Effective

Nielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad exposureLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Top Ad Verticals for Ad Effectiveness(General Recall), Adults 18+

64%Avg.

A18+ Gen.

Recall ofFull Ep

Video Ads

46%Avg.

18+ Gen.

Recall ofTV Ads

Top Content Genres for Ad Effectiveness(General Recall), Adults 18+

.in These Genres: and in TheseAd Verticals:

Note: More Brand Effect metrics (Brand Recall, Message Recall, Likeability) for Ads in Full Episodes Online vs. TV across Genres and Ad Verticals are available in the appendix.

Online Video Ads During Short FormVideos are Most Effective


42/121

42



Videos are Most Effective

Top Demo for Ad Effectiveness Metrics


(by largest difference between short form video and TV)

Top Ad Verticals for Ad Effectiveness(General Recall), Adults 18+

.in TheseAd Verticals: and in This Demo:

Note: More ad effectiveness metrics across demos, genres, verticals and online formats are available in the appendix.

Women 18-34

Short Form Online Video is More EffectiveThan TV Across Demos


43/121

43



Than TV Across Demos

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networks Primetime, non-sportsNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+ Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceOnline & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad stream. Limited to the same brands that streamed online and airedon TV during the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Men 18-34 Women 18-34

Men 18-49 Women 18-4945%

Avg.RecallA18-49SF Ads

44%

Avg.RecallA18-49TV Ads

Note: More slides are available in the appendix that show Short Form vs. TV Brand Effect across the

following demos: A18+, M18+, W18+, A18-49, A18-34, A35-64, M35-64, W35-64

42%Avg.Recall

A18-34SF Ads

40%Avg.

RecallA18-34TV Ads

Across Demos, Video Ads are More Effectivein Full Episodes Online Than on TV


44/121

44



p

Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networks . Primetime, non-sportsNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+. Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceOnline & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad stream. Limited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Men 18-34 Women 18-34

Men 18-49 Women 18-4962%Avg.Recall

A18-49ull Ep Ads

42%Avg.Recall

A18-49TV Ads

57%Avg.Recall

A18-49Full Ep Ads

39%Avg.Recall

A18-34TV Ads

Note: More slides are available in the appendix that show Full Episodes Online vs. TV Brand Effect

across the demos: A18+, M18+, W18+, A18-49, A18-34, A35-64, M35-64, W35-64

Across Several Ad Verticals, Short Form OnlineVideo Ads Are More Memorable Than TV Ads


45/121

45



Video Ads Are More Memorable Than TV Ads


General Recall Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+

49%Avg.en. Recall ofF Video Ads

47%Avg.

Gen. Recallof TV Ads

Tech, Telecom and Food & Beverage, Pharma Categories Are Most Effective Tech and Health & Beauty Video Ads Online Significantly Outperform TV

Note: More Brand Effectiveness metrics (Brand Recall, Message Recall, Likeability) for Ads in Short Form

Video vs. TV across Ad Verticals are available in slides in the appendix.

Across Ad Verticals, Video Ads in Full EpisodesOnline Are More Memorable Than TV Commercials


46/121

46



Online Are More Memorable Than TV Commercials


General Recall Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+

64%Avg.en. Recallof Full EpVideo Ads

46%

Avg.Gen. Recallof TV Ads

Finance, Retail, Restaurants, Hospitality and Pharma are Most Effective Online

Finance, Retail, Hospitality and Health & Beauty Video Ads Outperform TV by 20Percentage Points or More

Note: More Brand Effectiveness metrics (Brand Recall, Message Recall, Likeability) for Ads in Full Episodes

Online vs. TV across Ad Verticals are available in slides in the appendix.


47/121

Across Ad Verticals, Ad Messages Are MoreMemorable in Full Episode Online Than on TV


48/121

48



Memorable in Full Episode Online Than on TV


Message Recall Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+

40%Avg.MessageRecall ofull EpisodeVideo Ads

20%Avg.Message

Recallof TV Ads

More Than Twice as Many Recall Messages Online Than on TV for Hospitality,Finance, Health & Beauty


Across Ad Verticals, Video Ads Are MoreLikeable in Full Episodes Online Than on TV


49/121

49



Likeable in Full Episodes Online Than on TV


Likeability of Ads Across Categories, Adults 18+

28%Avg.

Likeabilityof Full EpVideo Ads

15%Avg.

Likeabilityof TV Ads

Online Video Ads are More Than Twice as Likeable Than on TV for Hospitality,Pharma and Auto



50/121


51/121

51




Video Brand Effect by Vertical

CPG and Non-CPG

Both CPG and Non-CPG Video Ads are More Effectivein Full Episodes Online Than on TV


52/121

52




CPG Adults 18+ Non-CPG Adults 18+

64%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18+

Full Ep Ads

46%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18+TV Ads

About Two-Thirds of Full Episode Streamers Recall the Ad

Note: Ads in CPG and non-CPG brand effect differ from ads in share-shift section, but CPG and non-CPG Ad Verticals are similar.

CPG Video Ads are More Effective in Short FormVideo Online Than on TV


53/121

53




CPG Adults 18+ Non-CPG Adults 18+

49%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18+

Ads inShort Form

47%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18+TV Ads

About Half of Short Form Streamers Recall the Ad


Online Video Ads During Full Episodesare Most Effective in These Genres


54/121

54



are Most Effective in These Genres


Top Content Genres for Non-CPG Ad Effectiveness(General Recall), Adults 18+

64%Avg.

Gen.Recall ofideo Ads

46%Avg.

Gen.Recall ofTV Ads

Top Content Genres for CPG Ad Effectiveness(General Recall), Adults 18+

.For CPG: For Non-CPG:


/Tribute/Tribute (Non-Competiton)

,Effective in Short Form Videos Online Than onTV


55/121

55



TV


CPG Men 18-34 CPG Women 18-34

CPG Men 18-49 CPG Women 18-4945%

Avg.Recall

A18-49Short Form

Ads

39%Avg.Recall

A18-49TV Ads

42%Avg.Recall

A18-34Short Form

Ads

37%Avg.Recall

A18-34TV Ads


Across Demos, Non-CPG Video Ads areOn Par with TV in Short Form Videos


56/121

56




Non-CPG Men 18-34 Non-CPG Women 18-34

Non-CPG Men 18-49 Non-CPG Women 18-4944%

Avg.Recall

A18-49Short Form

Ads

45%Avg.Recall

A18-49TV Ads

42%Avg.Recall

A18-49Full Ep Ads

41%Avg.Recall

A18-34TV Ads


Across Demos, CPG Video Ads are MoreEffective in Full Episodes Online Than on TV


57/121

57




CPG Men 18-34 CPG Women 18-34

CPG Men 18-49 CPG Women 18-4960%

Avg. Gen.Recall

A18-49Full Ep.

Ads

41%Avg. Gen.

Recall

A18-49TV Ads

56%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18-34

Full Ep Ads

39%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18-34TV Ads


Across Demos, Non-CPG Video Ads are MoreEffective in Full Episodes Online Than TV


58/121

58




Non-CPG Men 18-34 Non-CPG Women 18-34

Non-CPG Men 18-49 Non-CPG Women 18-4963%

Avg.Gen.

RecallA18-49

Full Ep Ads

43%Avg. Gen

Recall

A18-49TV Ads

58%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18-34

Full Ep Ads

39%Avg. Gen.

RecallA18-34TV Ads



59/121

Across Genres, Non-CPG Online Video Ads DuringFull Episodes Are More Memorable Than TV Ads

Video Ads in Documentaries SciFi Talk Drama and Animation in Full


60/121

60



Nielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

General Recall Across Genres, Adults 18+

64%

Avg.Gen. Recall

Video Ads inFull Episodes

46%Avg.

Gen. Recallof TV Ads

Video Ads in Documentaries, SciFi, Talk, Drama and Animation in Full

Episodes Online Have Best General Recall

Trib

ute

(Com

petitio

n)

(Non

-Com

petitio

n)



61/121

61




Digital Video Ad Behaviors

On average, people streaming video watchthe majority of the ads featured


62/121

62



20secondsthe average length of viewing per

online video ad

87%the average completion percent of

those viewing ads in online video

Nielsen Video Analytics DataMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012

Those viewing Long Form content watch adslonger than those viewing Short Form content


63/121

63



% Increase of Long Form

over Short Form

Nielsen Video Analytics DataMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012Includes a mix of ad lengths

Mid-Roll Ads* Have Higher Viewing CompletionRates Than Either Pre-roll Or Post-roll Ads


64/121

64



At tenti veness

Score:

At tenti veness

Score:

At tentiveness

Score:

Nielsen Video Analytics DataMeasurement Period: January 2011-March 2012

Adsin

ShortF

orm

Conte

nt

Adsin

LongFo

rm

Content

76

88

64

At tenti veness

Score:

At tentiveness

Score:

At tent iveness

Score:

78

80

73

Video Analytics Attentiveness Score is a single number measuring the overall quality ofviewers experiences with a particular video, ad or ad/content interaction. Variables used tocalculate the score include: time spent viewed/length of clip, usage of pause, skip, or rewindfeatures, in or out of focus, increase/decreases in volume, going full screen, repeat viewing.* Mid roll in short form can refer to ads in between short form video during playlists.


65/121

65




Different Types of Video Viewing:- Short Form Video vs. Long Form- Professional Video vs. UGC- Viewing Trends Across Categories

Short Form Content Reaches Nine in TenOnline Video Viewers


66/121

66



Active Online Reach

(%)

Note: Each chart features mutually exclusive categories; on the full slide,there are three non-exclusive categories: Short Form Content, Long FormContent, and Professionally Produced Content, and may feature overlapfrom other categories. All other categories are mutually exclusive.

Nielsen NetView, March 2012Home & Work Usage

Nearly

ALLStreamers Watch

Short Form Video

*Long Form Video refers to any video over 24 minutes long and includes full episodes. Short form refers to under 24 minutes. See Sl. 11 for full definitions.

Most Online Video Viewed is Short Form


67/121

67



Total Number of Online Videos Streamed (%)

Note: Each chart features mutually exclusive categories; on the full slide,there are three non-exclusive categories: Short Form Content, Long FormContent, and Professionally Produced Content, and may feature overlapfrom other categories. All other categories are mutually exclusive. Full

Nielsen NetView, Avg. Mos. (1/11-3/12)Home & Work Usage

Roughly Four out of Five Minutes Spent WatchingDigital Video is of Short Form Content

Total Time Spent Streaming Online Video (%)

*Long Form Video refers to any video over 24 minutes long and includes full episodes, short form refers to under 24 minutes.See Sl. 11 for full definitions.

Short Form and Long Form Digital VideoShow Seasonal Jan. Spike


68/121

68



*Netflix changed its methodology in April and May, impacting Time Spent StreamingMovies (Long Form) and Movie Trailer (Short Form)

Avg. Monthly Short Form Time Spent Streaming: 26 Billion Minutes

Avg. Monthly Long Form Time Spent Streaming: 5.3 Billion Minutes

Total Time Spent Streaming Online Video

YoY Change: +9% +2% -1%

YoY Change: -1% +18% -3%

Source: NetView Online PanelMeasurement Period: January 2011 March 2012. Total Minutes SpentViewing (Sum Total). Short Form is defined as online video content lessthan 24 minutes in length. Long Form is defined as online video contentlonger than 24 minutes in length. Short form and Long form are mutuallyexclusive categories. Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.


69/121

Professionally Produced Content Reaches9 in 10 Online Video Viewers; UGC Reaches 8 in 10


70/121

70



Active Online Reach

(%)

Nielsen NetView, March 2012(Typical month)Home & Work Usage

Nearly

ALLstreamers watch

professionally

produced

video

*See Sl. 11 for full definitions.

Brand channels were pulled out of YouTube traffic and attributed to professionally produced content.

Measurement Period: January 2011 March 2012. Total Minutes SpentViewing (Sum Total). Short Form is defined as online video content lessthan 24 minutes in length. Long Form is defined as online video contentlonger than 24 minutes in length. Short form and Long form are mutuallyexclusive categories. Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.

Two-Thirds of Time Spent Streaming is ofProfessionally Produced Video


71/121

71



Total Time Spent Streaming Online Video (%)

Nielsen NetView, Avg. Mos. (1/11-3/12)Home & Work Usage

UGC Accounts for 42% of Videos of Videos Streamed Roughly 1 Out of Every 3 Minutes Viewing Online Video is UGC

Total Online Videos Streamed (%)

Measurement Period: January 2011 March 2012. Total Minutes SpentViewing (Sum Total). Short Form is defined as online video content less than24 minutes in length. Long Form is defined as online video content longer than24 minutes in length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusivecategories. Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.

*See Sl. 11 for full definitions.

Brand channels were pulled out of YouTube traffic and attributed to professionally produced content.

UGC and Professional Digital Video Grow;Both Seasonally Spike in Jan.


72/121

72



Avg. Monthly Min. Streaming UGC: 27.7 Billion Minutes

Avg. Monthly Min. Streaming Pro Content: 17.1 Billion Minutes

Total Time Spent Streaming

YoY Change: +10% +8% -1%

YoY Change: +21% +12% +8%

Source: NetView Online Panel. Measurement Period: January 2011 March 2012.Total Minutes Spent Viewing (Sum Total). Short Form is defined as online videocontent less than 24 minutes in length. Long Form is defined as online video contentlonger than 24 minutes in length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusivecategories. Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.

Streamers of UGC and Professional ContentAre Similar

More Streamers are Women


73/121

73



Nielsen NetView, March 2012

Total Professionally Produced Videos Streamed

But Men Stream More Professional Videos and UGC, especially UGC

Total Unique Streamers

Time Spent Streaming: F 47% : M 53% Time Spent Streaming: F 43% : M 57%

Short Form is defined as online video content less than 24 minutes inlength. Long Form is defined as online video content longer than 24 minutesin length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusive categories. FullEpisodes are considered Long Form Content.

News & Info Has More Than Twice the Reachof Any Other Genre of Online Video


74/121

74



Active Online Streaming Reach(%)

Nielsen NetView, March 2012Home & Work Usage

Nearly

HALF of allstreamers

view TV

shows andclips online.

Total Minutes Spent Viewing (Sum Total). Short Form is defined as online videocontent less than 24 minutes in length. Long Form is defined as online video contentlonger than 24 minutes in length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusivecategories. Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.

More Time is Spent Streaming Portals,News & Info Video Than Any Other Genre


75/121

75



Avg. Monthly Total Time Spent Streaming Online Video(in MM hours)

Nielsen NetView, 12 mos. avg. 1/11-12/12Home & Work Usage

Users View

Three Times

as Many

Minutes of

News & InfoThan TV

Shows

50% more time isspent streaming TVonline than Movies

Short Form is defined as online video content less than 24 minutes inlength. Long Form is defined as online video content longer than 24 minutesin length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusive categories. FullEpisodes are considered Long Form Content.

Time Spent Streaming Professionally ProducedVideo Grows 8% Year Over Year Largely driven by Full Length Movies, News & Info, and Games

YoY


76/121

76


IAB Online Video StudyShort Form is defined as online video content less than 24 minutes in length. Long Form isdefined as online video content longer than 24 minutes in length. Full Episodes areconsidered Long Form Content.

*Netflix changed its methodology in April and May, resulting in Movie Trailer drop in Time SpentStreaming .Feb. chosen for YoY comparison to avoid Jan. seasonality

YoY

%Chg2/11-2/12

8%

14%

-29%

25%

-28%

-42%

-33%

36%

ProfessionallyProducedContent

Total Time Spent Streaming (Min.)

Jan. 2011 Mar. 2012

Source; NetView Online PanelTotal Minutes Spent Viewing (Sum Total)

Demos of Video Genres by Videos Streamed

Profi le by Total Number of Online Videos Streamed (%)


77/121

77



Nielsen NetView, March 2012

y ( )

Short Form is defined as online video content less than 24 minutes inlength. Long Form is defined as online video content longer than 24 minutesin length. Short form and Long form are mutually exclusive categories.Full Episodes are considered Long Form Content.


78/121

78




Appendix

Identifying Future Opportunities With LearningsFrom Past Studies


79/121

79



Aggregated 18 different studies fromdifferent advertisers across categoriesincluding: Food

Health & Beauty Beverage Technology Auto Retail Finance Telecom

CPG break out includes aggregate of Food,

Health & Beauty, and Beverages

Mobile Video Viewing Is Growing Along WithOnline Video


80/121

80



From Nielsen Cross Platform Report, Q1 2012Mobile video user projection, time spent and composition data are based on survey analysisof past 30 day use during the period. The mobile video audience figures in this reportinclude mobile phone users (aged 13+) who access mobile video through any means(including mobile Web, subscription-based, downloads and applications).

Digital Video Viewing is GrowingAmong TV Viewers % ChangeJan 2011-

Mar 2012


81/121

81



+12%

Avg.

MinutesStream

edPerMonth


+14%1/11

-1/12

+12%2/11

-2/12

+10%3/11

-3/12

Among Cross-Platform Homes Panel, A18+

Online Video Streaming Usage by TV Viewers

(4 hrs)

(3.5hrs)

(3 hrs)

(2.5hrs)


82/121


83/121

Prior Exposure to Short Form Online VideoAds Makes TV More Effective Across Demos

49%


84/121

84





Adults 18-34 Adults 35-64

A18-49Avg TV+

ShortFormVideo

42%Avg. TV

A18-49

Prior Exposure to Full Episode Online VideoAds Makes TV More Effective Across Demos


85/121

85






49%A18-49vg TV+

Full EpVideo

42%

Avg. TVA18-49

Duplication: Prior Exposure to Non-VideoOnline Ads Makes TV More Effective


86/121

86






50%AvgTV+

OnlineA18-49

43%Avg. TVA18-49

Duplication: Prior Exposure to Short FormOnline Video Ads Makes TV More Effective


87/121

87




Adults 18+

Adults 18-49




88/121

88




Men 18+ Women 18+

Men 18-49 Women 18-49



89/121

89




Men 18-34 Women 18-34

Men 35-64 Women 35-64



90/121

90



Standard TV includes TV ads on both cable and broadcast networks . Primetime, non-sports

Nielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Green arrows indicate a positive difference at >90% confidenceOnline & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period; specificcreative executions may vary

Adults 18+ Adults 18-49




91/121

91




Men 18+ Women 18+

Men 18-49 Women 18-49



92/121

92




Men 18-34 Women 18-34

Men 35-64 Women 35-64



93/121

93






Men 18-49 Women 18-4945%

Avg.RecallA18-49SF Ads

44%Avg.RecallA18-49TV Ads


Men 18-49 Women 18-49

62%Avg.

RecallA18-49


94/121

94





Men 18 49 Women 18 49A18 49ull Ep Ads

42%Avg.Recall

A18-49TV Ads


95/121



96/121

96





Men 18+ Women 18+

Men 18-49 Women 18-49


97/121

Across Genres, Nearly Twice as Many Recallthe Brand Advertised in Online Video Than on TV Roughly Half Recall the Brand Online vs. 1 in 4 on TV

Online Documentaries, Science Fiction and Talk Especially Outperform TV


98/121

98


IAB Online Video StudyNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV during the same period;specific creative executions may vary. TV ads include primetime, non-sports

Brand Recall Across Genres, Adults 18+

50%Avg.

Brand Recallfor Video Ads

27%Avg.

Brand Recallfor TV Ads

O e ocu e ta es, Sc e ce ct o a d a spec a y Outpe o

Trib

ute

Advic

e

Adve

nture

Brand recall only asked of those who correctly recall general recall.Message recall, only shown to those who correctly recall brand.


99/121


100/121

Top Genres for Online Video Ad EffectivenessVideo Ad on an Online Full Episode Player vs. TV Commercial


101/121

101


IAB Online Video StudyNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad streamLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Across Some Ad Verticals, Short Form OnlineVideo Brands Are More Memorable Than TV Ads

Tech, Food & Beverage, Health & Beauty, Telecom and Pharma Video Ads

Online Significantly Outperform TV Commercials


102/121

102


IAB Online Video StudyNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad exposureLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Brand Recall Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+32%

Avg.

Brand Recallof Video Ads

28%Avg.

Brand Recallof TV Ads

g y

Brand recall only asked of those who correctly recall general recall.Message recall, only shown to those who correctly recall brand.

,Video Messages Are More Memorable Than TV

Ads Health & Beauty, Telecom, Pharma, Food & Beverage and Tech Categories Significantly Outperform TV

Online Video Ads for Health & Beauty and Pharma Have Twice the Message Recall of TV Commercials


103/121

103


IAB Online Video StudyNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad exposureLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TV

Message Recall Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+

24%Avg.MessageRecall of

Video Ads

21%Avg.

MessageRecall ofTV Ads

y g

Brand recall only asked of those who correctly recall general recall.

Message recall, only shown to those who correctly recall brand.

Across Some Ad Verticals, Short FormOnline Video Ads Are More Likeable Than TV Ads

Health & Beauty, Food & Beverage, Tech and Telecom Ads Online Are Most Likeabl

Health & Beauty and Tech Video Ads Online Significantly Outperform TV


104/121

104


IAB Online Video StudyNielsen Video Brand Effect (IAG), 01.01.11 - 03.31.12, A18+Online & TV data based on responses up to 1 day post-ad exposureLimited to the same brands that streamed online and aired on TVduring the same period; specific creative executions may vary

Likeability Across Ad Verticals, Adults 18+

17%Avg.Likeabilityf Video Ads

15%

Avg.Likeabilityof TV Ads


105/121


106/121

106



Nielsen Panel Methodologies

200,000+ monthly panelists with a passive meter capturing

all internet connected activity. Measurement captures both

Home and Work usage.

Nielsen

Online

NetView Panel


107/121

107



Metercapabilitiesinclude:

WebmeasurementApplicationsTrackingDevice

Measurement

StreamingMediaAudioMeasurementSiteCensus DataPageContentFull

URL

detail

Searchterms

Nielsen Cross Platform Homes Panel SingleSource

Panel of 10,000 Households (25,000 panelists) ages 2+


108/121

108



with both National TV People Meters and NetView PCmeters installed in their homes

Panelists are in the panel for a maximum of 2 years

Allows broad analytics on TV and Internet usage surfing

and streaming Internet usage restricted to in home internet use

Nielsens

TV/Internet

Data

Fusion

Methodology

Fusion links one TV panelist with oneOnline panelist Age and gender as critical cells

TV/Internet fusion links Nielsens 200,000 person NetView Online panel, with the

50,000 person National People Meter Television Panel


109/121

109



Online panelist

Clara35 years old

NYC

Presence ofchildren 2-11

10 hrs online/wk

Sara35 years old

NYC

Presence ofchildren 2-11 10 hrs online/wk

TV Panelist Online Panelist

Age and gender as critical cells(must-match criteria)

A carefully selected list of other

demographic variables including:Presence of children 2-11Presence of children 12-17EducationHousehold SizeHousehold IncomeZip Code

Race

Home and work Internet usage datacollected via surveys will also beused as hooks during the fusion


110/121

110



Video Brand Effect Methodology


111/121

Video Brand Effect addresses a variety ofstrategic questions

How does the advertisers pre-roll or in-stream ads performagainst Online Video and TV ad effectiveness norms?


112/121

112



against Online Video and TV ad effectiveness norms?

What is the "amplifying effect of the advertisers online videoad campaign on their concurrent TV campaign?

How does frequency of exposure impact Online Videocampaign effectiveness?

What role does frequency of exposure play across platforms?

For example, is there greater impact when an advertisers targetconsumer is exposed to your campaign twice on TV and twice inonline video versus being exposed all four times on TV?

How are your microsites performing relative to your primaryWeb properties?

Real-world media consumption, real-timemeasurement

RewardTV is thedata engine for


113/121

113



gNielsen Video andTV Brand Effect.

Its an on-line

research panelpositioned to

consumers as aTV/Video trivia

website.

*Brand impact is measured up to 24 hours after exposure for comparison to TVand up to a maximum 7 days after exposure for online comparisons

Brand Effect (IAG) data collection

1. Panelists log in toRewardTV.com

2. Select the shows theywatched on TV (P1D)

1. Panelists log in toRewardTV.com

2. Select the shows theywatched on TV (P1D)/O li (P7D)


114/121

114



/Online (P7D)3. Answer questions

about the TV andOnline shows theywatched & the videoads and placementswithin

4. Answer questionsabout the taggedInternet ads exposed(P7D) mostly short-form video and display

5. Earn reward points forquestions they answercorrectly

/Online (P7D)3. Answer questions

about the TV and

Online shows theywatched & the videoads and placementswithin

4. Answer questionsabout the taggedInternet ads exposed(P7D) mostly short-form video and display

5. Earn reward points forquestions they answercorrectly

Soft incentives do not alter viewing

behavior. People participate because its a

fun extension of their TV-viewing

experience!

Survey

Process:

Like

TV,

panelists

select

an

online

show

onwhichtotakeasurvey


115/121

115



Standard Ad Questions


116/121

116



TV Brand Effect ad performance metrics definedRECALL Metrics

quantify the net impact of advertising

1. Is the adbreaking

through?

LINKAGE Metrics

isolate and diagnose the

creative elements


117/121

117



Among those who

recall the ad, the %

who recalled the

brand

Brand Linkage

g

2. Is the brand

communicated?

3. Is the message

communicated?

4. Is the ad well

liked?

Message Linkage

Among those who

recall the brand, the %

who recalled themessage

Likeability Linkage

Among those who

recall the brand,

the % who likedthe ad

5. Did the ad impact

product intent? Optional Purchase/Usage Intent

Brand Effect

Comparison TV Brand Effect (IAG) Video Brand Effect (IAG) Online Brand Effect Mobile Brand Effect

MethodologyOpportunity-To-See

(RewardTV)Opportunity-To-See

(RewardTV)Test-Control (Facebook)

Opportunity-To-See+ Test-Control (On-

Device)

Focus Break-through Break-through Attitudinal ImpactBreak-through +

Attitudinal Impact

Program

EngagementYes Yes (Long-form only) No No


118/121

118



g g

Standard Ads Yes Yes Yes Yes

Branded

EntertainmentYes Yes (Long-form only) No No

Formats Measured TVFull-Episode Video (Long-form content) + Short-form

video

Online video, Display, RichMedia

Online video, Display,Rich Media

BenchmarksIn-stream Online Video,

TV, Cross-Media Lift

Long-form Video: Video, TVShort-form video: Video,

Display and TVOnline Video, Display Ads

TV, Online Video, DisplayAds

Tagging N/A: Self-reported

Long-form Video: VideoPlayer Beacon

Short-form video: CreativePixel Tag

Creative Pixel Tag Re-Targeting/UDID

Exposure

Response LagUp to 1 Day

Up to 1 Day(Max. Up to 7 days)

Up to 1 Day Up to 1 Day

Required

Impressions

Can measure anythingabove 20 GRPs

15MM impressions ~ 100survey sample (no cap)

1.5MM unique impressions~ 600-800 survey sample

per cell (up to total of 3,600to 4,800 across cells)

Depends on format


119/121

(B) TV Commercial Survey

Among TV Exposed

(A) Online Video Survey

Among Online Exposed

Nielsen TV & Online Video panelists come from thesame source


120/121

120



Comparable data collection methodology

and comparable ad effectiveness metrics

across both platforms!

Among TV ExposedAmong Online Exposed

(1)Online Only

Exposed(Single Platform)

(3) TV Only

Exposed(Single Platform)

(2) TV + Online

Exposed(Dual Platform)

Questions?


121/121

121




Questions?

Sherrill Mane

SVP Research, Analytics & Measurement, [email protected]

Kristina Sruoginis

Research Director, [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

TV Advertising Viewing

Documents

Transcript of TV Advertising Viewing