Sponsor (May-Aug 1957)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

signed t" the introductorj campaign Producl \. !!<• then spelled oul the . r i — v^ li \ of l\ iii terms ol potential frequenc) of advertising message, relative cost-per-M f"r \ ar i< >u potential buys, four-week audience. • \\ r usuall) consider ;i L 3week introductory campaign tin basic minimum," Kemp told ^n.\M>i{. "That th introdueton campaign seemed ni Product X's purchase pattern, tin average consumer buys such i product about once ,i week or every Had the new product been an ippliance, nr other infrequentl) pur■ I item, we'd have thought in of a nine-months 01 even \earintroducton campaign, >ince .in original campaign should span three or four cycles of buying for ii t." Producl \ s introductory campaign in make the brand which known i-t. "'One of the li»'-l ways to do this with 20-second chainbreaks where iir media are concerned," savs wemp. "But that's where the c<>]>\ t rat eg) comes in to guide us. If copy i ater length, we might as well et 20's, no matter how effective might be in just getting the brand ame known. Also, if we're talking demonstrable product advan as we were with Product X, we'll •infiltrate on tv. not radio." The budget for the introduction of roduct X nationally was $1.5 million. his meant that if tv was to be used. ntire budget would have to go into tedium to do an adequate job. "Since we were working out Prod\ media strategy about three or ur months before Product X was ady for test markets." Kemp told 'ONSOR, "this meant that the marketg department actually began work on oduct X close to six months before I W market time. We had a three-year ,-edia plan, since we consider three Jars the pay-out period in this case. tie client realized that he'd be spendjg more than expected revenue during r introductory period, but anticiites profits after the first three '\ears I e over." Marketing men go i" work first on new i ml "i product, aftei briefing bom a/eon client aims, profit expectant-). Hill Nevin (1.) v.p. charge of marketing, help* Larry Horner, one of 15 Compton mark, itives in mappi Media executives base recommendatioiu on data: marketing ploj copj i Manner S< ulfurt • r. > or another "( five associate media directors, i u Ben product account group, responsible to Prank K> mp, media v. p., and t" accoun) On the air: Once all the strategy oposals — marketing, copy and media were formulated, the account group shed them out critically. The plans ye also reviewed by the client brand Programing decisions, made by Lewis Tittert"ii. v.p. of radio-tv (r.) and John Egan. executive producer, are also guided by client marketing aims