Sponsor (Jan-June 1953)

IV/ti/ «ti advertiser should be interested in television as a medium lones walked into the boss' offit • with his just-completed television sales tation neatly and confidently tucked under his arm. The) exchanged the usual greetings, and us Sam placed his work of an in front of the boss he couldn't help thinking to himself how impressed the man hehmd the large mahogany desk would be. He would be especially pleased. Sum thought, with that two-pagi list oj reasons why Mr. Advertiser should net into television. The boss turned the pane quickly. turned hud, to Sum's "impressive list." The well-dressed and somewhat nervous young man leaned forward in his chair. The boss was now intently reading. The phrases kept flashing through Sam's mind: "Sight plus sound" "keeping pine with the competition" "strong family appeal" "product demonstration" "memory impact" "high believability." .... "It's a fine list, Sam. no doubt about that. The reasons all make good sense. But . . ." Scribbling something across the page, he handed it to Sam. "Let's say it this way." The Boss had written just one word on the blank sheet of paper . . . "Results." The story of Sam brings home that important point: The advertiser is concerned with results above all else. In television, as in all media, results are closely tied with costs. And today in television the cost to Ui. idvertiser of reaching each potential customer has been going down. For each dollar spent. Mi. Advertiser tea: In, I VI'', more potential customers during the yeai prior to mid-1952 than the preceding year! At the jiresent time, 2.699 counties out of 3,000 are exposed to television. Conservative estimates point to <in, it her 6.000,000 receivers during the yeai ahead alone. As to 7 1 results, we can only look to the record. It shows, for example, that during the second quarter of 1952, some 1,567 national advertisers were using net and spot television, to say nothing of the thousands of advertisers in local mm lets. Preliminary 1952 figures point to an advertising investment in television of over $580.1 mi/lion, ilt might be noted that during TV's rise since 1948 all media profited by over a $2 billion increase in the total advertising expenditure.) We believe that S580.1 million is the best testimonial to the one ingredient which Sum left out — "results." // c I, now that the American advertiser does not place his faith (and his money) in anything that falls short of that goal. Thad H. Bhow \ Jr.. Vice President and Counsel in charge of Television Affairs. !\ ARTB-TV Television: | \ is a medium of so main firsts it's hard to be objective. For example. TV is: 1. First in dollar-volume growth — up 476$ since 1949. 2. First in circulation growth — from 1(>.47(> homes 1 Januar) 1^17 to over 23 million today (NBC estimates!. A. First in impact — no impartial media expert disputes this. Reason: sighl plus sound plus motion. I. r>i,_._:cst decrease in cost-per-l.OOO I homes) reached -down (>l.i!', since 1 Januar \ I'M'). ,,n CBS TV. for example. I Gross costs, however, are waj up.) I \ ranks filth in media todaj -from the standpoint of dollar volume. It s picked up Irom $150 million to $200 million a year for each oi the past three years. If it continuethis growth, there's no doubt it will surpass magazine* and radio to become the third medium by the end of 1953 (to rank alter newspapers, direct mail). \\ hether TV can ever catch newspapers' huge $2.5 billion dollar volume is problematical. Chief reason it will be hard: Newspapers can add more pages to accommodate more advertisers: station time periods are limited. (This curbed radio network growth in '30's.) Possible trend to watch in TV: use of sales money (instead of advertising funds) to pay costs on grounds TV can do much of the work of the sales force. Two questions admen pose in considering TV: 1. When will it stop growing? One guesstimate heard frequently in the field: at around 1,000 stations grossing s],5 billion to $2 billion a year. 2. How will advertisers pay for TV? sponsor's media tables show that all media, except network radio, continue to grow, so media-robbing to pay for TV is not as serious as some make it out to be. Secondly, interviews revealed that more sales money is being used. (Network radio, incidentally, is in throes of a comeback.) Can advertisers continue to spend more on TV? Here's how one major advertiser answered this question for SPONSOR: "All advertising is part of the selling expense. So long as sales keep climbing, well keep spending!" * * * TV costper1 ,000 homes down 67.8% since 7949 MOO 3.00 200 1.00 0 Jon I 1949 ' __________ _____ _____________ — I9S0 1951 1952 1953 SOURCE: CBS T\ . i. [| ilation ol B i ol >i In-, evening show CBS TV. Where did you see or hear product advertised? CATEGORY SAW OR HEARD AD NEWSPAPER MAGAZINE RADIO TV CIGARETTES 80.8', 39.2', 76.9', 74.0' ( (Hi.1% SOAP 65.0', 78. 6f, 78.0'r 75.9% 45.3% AUTO 66.5', 28.3', 20.2r, 70.5', :i».T"„ DRUG 56. T, 27.7', 10.4'c 11.4<c 10.3% AVERAGE 67.3', 28.5', 76.4'; 75.5', 47.6% SOURCE: Advertcsl survey based on 762 Interview X.'J N.J area 6 16 Octobei 1052 From "The Televl Ion ludlence ol Today," October 1962, copyrighl 1952 bs U ' tesi Research Respondents wen Bsked II they saw oi heard ads day before 40 SPONSOR