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.

^SPONSOR AUGUST 1937 ARE CLIENTS DUCKING ON TV PACKAGE SHOWS? A growing minorit) of clients aren't paying show commissions, enrrent ANA snrve\ nveals. Here's how clients, agencymen evaluate inroads into the commission system ^J\<\ a dozen national advertisers don't pa) an\ commission to theii agencies lor package tv -hows. This has been revealed in a justcompleted \N \ survej of it> members, SPONSOR learned. The sur\e\ resultwere being distributed to the \\\ membership at presstime. The big question the survej raise* but doe not answer: Is this the big chink in the 1 .V , commission system*s armor and a tipoff on the direction in which advertiser-agency compensation is now mo\ ing .' Part of the answer will come out of another \\ \ report — the one on agencv compensation which Prof. Albert Fre\ of Dartmouth will unwrap at the 28 October \\\ Convention. Bui the answer will reallj depend on what advertisers do in practice. This is the real significance of the present \\\ stud] 'conducted b) itradio-tv committee). It shows what advertisers are doing now. The ANA committee polled and received answers from 7!! national advertisers. Of these. 37 had networkproduced -how-. 31 had independently produced packages and In had agencyproduced shows. Thirteen of the 7!! respondents reported that the\ don't pa) show commissions to their agen< ies. I bese I I had network <>r independent pack Vside from these 1 ! \N \ men who don't pa) -how commissions man) other t\ advertise] enc) service gratis for which the agenc) might Dormall) charge fees. In return I'M talent commissions, the) "rder special research projects, receive marketing aid. merchandising and frequentl) public it\ "t publit relations service. Whether the "free" service equals the amounl of the commission or tall fai short varii \ a prominent membei of the \N \ radio-t\ committee says, "It silently underst I. The exact amount of v-r\ ice for commission i individually negotiable and depend on the bargaining power of each client. Thi i true ■ t such giants as IW<.. Campbell and Chrysler as w-dl as -mallei clients." SPONSOR 31 UClsi 1 '>.">, 31