Why you should scrap your print ads

Interesting article via Craig McGinty.

Couple of key paragraphs:

"Online made viewer figures and click-through entirely measurable while our print ads relied on (some may say speculative) circulation figures. It's now the general belief that circulation figures don't mean Jack."

"So what I'm saying here is ditch your print ads and move your budget into something measurable. Something more targeted that can offer capture potential and drive real punters to your widgets. Basically, invest the same money in social ads."

Read in full: http://nikhewitt.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/why-you-should-scrap-your-print-ads.html

The above is a case study from the PR firm the guy who wrote the piece works for: http://www.tankpr.co.uk/case-studies/robomow

May I respectfully suggest that the author has reached no meaningful conclusions, let alone one justifying ditching one medium in favour of another?

That digital responses are capable of accurate measurement is indisputable. That responses to printed media are not measurable is likewise indisputable. The conclusions, however, are at best questionable and I would venture to suggest quite probably inaccurate and instantly dismissable.

Should you just happen to run an Adwords campaign, utterly measurable and statistically reliable, and get a result of, let's say, zero income for a £500 outlay you know exactly how effective your campaign has been. You may have designed some of it yourself, had the Google Adwords team to help with some of it and paid "independent" "experts" over and above the half a grand to help get results from that £500. Your measurable result is still zero.

A customer, when asked, responds that they hired you because of your support for their {name your own advert publisher here} in their newsletter/magazine/whatever, you know that medium has worked for you even though you may not be able to measure by knowing how many more responses it has elicited.

Even if you can identify the exact recompense from digital advertising, unless that can account for all of the growth in your revenues it is an unreliable witness. It also hides the fact that although the final purchase may have been through digital media, earlier non-digital awareness may have been the reason for pressing the digital button.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. Properly applied, statistical analysis can be of tremendous help in marketing. Sadly, statistical analysis is also amenable to interpretation (or manipulation) to imply whatever you would have it imply. When applied by marketeers the latter is far too often the case.

Replies

Freshscaped January 23, 2015 at 11:34pm

May I respectfully suggest that the author has reached no meaningful conclusions, let alone one justifying ditching one medium in favour of another?

That digital responses are capable of accurate measurement is indisputable. That responses to printed media are not measurable is likewise indisputable. The conclusions, however, are at best questionable and I would venture to suggest quite probably inaccurate and instantly dismissable.

Should you just happen to run an Adwords campaign, utterly measurable and statistically reliable, and get a result of, let's say, zero income for a £500 outlay you know exactly how effective your campaign has been. You may have designed some of it yourself, had the Google Adwords team to help with some of it and paid "independent" "experts" over and above the half a grand to help get results from that £500. Your measurable result is still zero.

A customer, when asked, responds that they hired you because of your support for their {name your own advert publisher here} in their newsletter/magazine/whatever, you know that medium has worked for you even though you may not be able to measure by knowing how many more responses it has elicited.

Even if you can identify the exact recompense from digital advertising, unless that can account for all of the growth in your revenues it is an unreliable witness. It also hides the fact that although the final purchase may have been through digital media, earlier non-digital awareness may have been the reason for pressing the digital button.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. Properly applied, statistical analysis can be of tremendous help in marketing. Sadly, statistical analysis is also amenable to interpretation (or manipulation) to imply whatever you would have it imply. When applied by marketeers the latter is far too often the case.
Mitchel ingham January 24, 2015 at 11:39pm

I have seen this spent £300 on a magazine run 3 months of adds supposed 15,000 distribution heard nothing back

I think your better off investing in google ad works if you have the money, or google seo optimization then getting a well sign written vehicle