About Nielsen ratings: live-plus-35-days is so now!

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by phrelin, Jun 1, 2016.

  1. Jun 1, 2016 #1 of 24
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,488
    449
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    For the guy who used to post daily ratings, the reality that made me stop is explained in this Hollywood Reporter article Introducing Live-Plus … 35-Day Ratings(!) as TV's New Normal Struggles:

    One thing is very clear to me about American home entertainment in the 21st Century - ratings reflect the fact that there are 300+ million viewers watching their own screens when they feel like it. A good example is this headline TV Ratings: 'Roots' Returns With a Robust 5.3 Million Viewers. Here are the ratings for the 1977 "Roots" miniseries:

    [​IMG]

    In 1977 the population was 220.2 million, in 2016 323.7 million - 47% higher.

    In 1977 30+ million viewers, 15% of the population, watched "Roots" as it aired, sharing a common experience.

    The 2016 version has "robust" ratings at 5+ million, 1.5% of the population.

    Now whether in 2016 the new version will have been viewed by 15% of the population 35 days out, who knows? But I rather doubt that anyone but the network and the advertisers will care.

    One thing is certain, it won't be a shared experience or even a "water cooler" subject.
     
  2. Jun 7, 2016 #2 of 24
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,643
    397
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Thing is... back when the original Roots aired, most markets had only 3 networks + PBS, so you typically only had a choice of 4 things to watch at any given time of day.

    I've made this argument before... even ignoring VCRs and DVRs... IF we still only had 4 choices of channels to watch, good shows would get much higher ratings. It's just basic math. More people are watching more TV than back in the 1970s for sure... but we have so much more choice that it is divided up.

    Some crap shows (I'm not talking about Roots here) back in the day got superb ratings because there wasn't much else on... and then a mini-series like Roots tended to get a bump for being a special thing, if you had a choice between Roots and something else, you chose Roots because who knows when that might be available to watch again?

    Now, you can DVR the new Roots... or it probably will be repeated a bunch of times too... then there's home video at some point, and probably eventually it will hit the streaming places.
     
  3. Jun 9, 2016 #3 of 24
    TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    The 'captive audience' paradigm of expecting folks to sit through commercials just gets less realistic every day.

    Internet ad buys will surpass linear TV ad buys very quickly. Maybe in a matter of weeks.

    35+ is surprising to me, because I didn't ever think Nielsen or anyone else would ever want to admit to themselves that shows are watched that far out from broadcast. But I see it as a positive move.

    So, If I need to buy ad time for my clients, I would buy TV time for stuff that is always for sale and is not time-sensitive, but I would buy on-line time for stuff that was not going to be relevant to someone watching the show a month later. An ad for a movie that came out a month ago is useless, because the movie is probably already out of the theaters. I get tired of seeing political ads all the way to Christmas for races that were decided in November, just because I didn't get to it all that quickly.
     
  4. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The "plus 35" will be good for shows with a later viewership ... right now there are two or three shows that I let sit more than a week and eventually catch up on. Sometimes I watch within seven days but often I watch two episodes ... one more than seven days old then the latest episode. With "plus 35" there will be a place for that type of viewership to be reported.

    Buying "immediate response" ads in a show that isn't watched immediately is a risk. I agree, the "come see our new movie tonight" ad is less valuable viewed a week later. But online advertising should be "immediate". If I stream a show today I should see ads valid for today, regardless of when the show originally aired.

    For DVR's programs one is generally stuck with the ads that were recorded when the program aired (if viewed at all). DVR inserted ads on cable channels can be changed based on the day playback occurs. But online ads have the best chance of being current - they are being streamed as they are viewed.
     
  5. TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    I've been trying to suggest for a couple years now that DBS companies use the live insert technology that they already have inside every DVR to sell 'time-share' ads to secondary clients, so that instead of that political spot that aired in October, I would see the spot for a new movie in its place, even if I watch it months later. All they have to do is put one foot in front of the other, over and over, and make that happen. It's money left on the table.

    If they want to count me in the ratings, they are going to have to go to "plus 900". I'm just now finishing up White Collar from 2014. Still got 45 The Good Wife eps backed up.
     
  6. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    For cable networks they do it ... but only for the ad breaks that belong to DISH and DIRECTV (the breaks they normally fill from their head end and cover with market specific DVR ads). They would need the channel's permission to cover additional ad breaks. For broadcast networks there are no inserts for cable and satellite.
     
  7. TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    That's true, and I installed and maintained a 12-VCR system like that for Group W when that was new technology in 1982. It used audible DTMF (telephone) tones to signal the VCRs, and it never worked well. And it required making spot tape reels. I think they got a couple bucks a spot.

    But what they could do today is different, or at least the technology is better. But it still is handcuffed by the same logistics of inability to target spots, as well as the inability to time them strategically into a show watched weeks later off of a DVR with much accuracy. I am not sure that they can insert a new spot into a show you recorded two months ago as you watch it today, other than a cheap ROS spot, but maybe; I can't be the only one thinking this is a good idea. But it certainly is not ramped up and it certainly is not business as usual, or ubiquitous in any way.

    Today, Sony can send a DBS headend a spot for this weekend's big movie release late on a Wednesday afternoon, and then late on a Wednesday night DBS could send it to the HDD on everyone's DVR. Then, once I play back a show on Thursday or Friday, possibly recorded 3 months earlier on my DVR, they could trigger-insert the new ad seamlessly over the top of the old ad, automatically. And then report back who watched the ad, who skipped the ad, and where they live, and the financial profile, as much as they know by what package you have, at least, back to the ad agency.

    That is a lot more effective than what Nielsen does regarding whether the spot was watched and by who, and that is very valuable data. They could also regionalize sales to regional companies, meaning a restaurant chain could target the buy to viewers within a 25-mile radius of the restaurant, and not have to waste it on people who lived 200 miles from that restaurant.

    A conventional ad just goes out into the ether to everyone, and no one really knows who watched it or when. All they have is ratings data per quarter hour.

    Conventional air time ad sales can't do anything like that, which is why we'll still be watching Trump and Clinton ads next Xmas. The reason internet ads are taking half the pie is because they can target the ads and mine the data. Selling secondary ads the way I am envisioning it could help level that playing field, and keep the big nets relevant, oh, I don't know, all the way to 2017 maybe.

    The hard part would be getting the ad sales contracts for the original ads to incorporate this, but a lower price is incentive, so I don't know why they would not want to do this. A company like Sony Pictures, who's ad timing is crucial, might be the key. They can just buy chunks of time and then have the service, operated by DTV, insert whatever was playing that weekend, into any show you recorded that they bought time on, regardless of when you recorded it. Then give DTV their little cut for making that possible.

    This is a used car salesman's wet dream. You get to sell the same product (the same chunk of air time) over and over again, for the same spot availability, like a time share. That way, when I finally watch that series finale ep of Limitless, in late 2018, I can get ads for the 2019 BMW instead of the 2016 BMW.
     
  8. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    DISH can ... and I assume DIRECTV can too. The DVR inserted ad is inserted based on when the program is watched. The triggers are in the recording. I assume that the underlying ad that is covered up is some ROS that can be skipped. When I have rewound a show back into one of the inserted commercial breaks I can see the covered up ads - the ads that non-DVR viewers see.
     
  9. TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    Well, yes. That is how it works. VANC data in the show as originally sent. Where else would the triggers be?

    The reason you can see them is because they depend on rolling time code, and if you interrupt that by scrolling around, it can confuse the system enough to reveal the original spots. The original implementation of this caused an uproar because the inserted spots messed up the skip/slip feature, also dependent on rolling time code, which messed up the ability to skip the spots, which people thought was something they were doing on purpose.

    And yes, they (DBS) can; learning that 'they can' was what gave me the idea in the first place. And by 'they', I was referring to cable, which is what you referenced. It's not my idea, and not a new idea. What would be new is implementing it across the board as SOP.

    They just don't, not on the level that they could, and do not apparently provide that service to advertisers that occupy the rest of the avails. They are covering one cheap spot with another, and probably only get the cable slots which is one minute per hour, approximately. But when 30 seconds in DWTS goes for 200K, why not sell it for 160K as a first run or live event (which there are then more eager buyers for), and sell it again for 70K as a secondary event, and then sell it again a month later for 30K, or a per-eyeball rate for whatever the data says how many actually played it back without skipping? The spots they are doing it with are just for peanuts.

    They could even sell it for 200K, a bird in the hand, then wait until they have a buyer for the secondary at 70K, and once that is locked up give the original buyer 40K worth of 'make goods' which are pretty inexpensive to do (just kill a promo), meaning they would come out with a net slightly more, actually, than 230K, for an avail they were originally selling for 200K, plus they just sold another 40K worth of spots to the first guy, meaning he spent his ad budget with them, rather than elsewhere.

    The infrastructure is there, and it's cheap. A network can hire one salesperson to keep track of this, and give DTV a 2% cut for the service. And we don't have to see spots for Hillary in January which do nothing but waste everyone's time. Everybody wins.

    And its good for business. Rather than offer just a 200K avail, you offer the client the choice of the solid 200K avail, the cheaper live+3 160K avail, the secondary avail at 70K, or the tertiary avail at 35K, or whatever combination works for them. They are not priced out of the market, and they can target strategically. This is the same strategy Apple used when they brought out the new 4"-screen iPhone...cover all market segments.

    The math works. Who turns down 'more' money for the same product? If they did this for 75% of their ad avails it could add hundreds of millions directly to their bottom line. Nothing makes them moan and wail more than not having something to put in that empty slot before it makes air, and this would help that issue as well, because it increases the ability of advertisers to buy, and it increases the make goods.

    Make goods are the dirty little secret. If a network or station blows a spot, no money goes back to the client, hardly ever. They just run it somewhere else and keep the money. Advertisers usually acquiesce to this, because they already have a budget they need to spend, have spent it, and want their money's worth, even if they get shifted to other slots. I worked with a guy who blew two local spots in a Superbowl once, though, who got fired because it cost the station a ton...no place to usually make good a blown spot in a SB. We offered them like 25 MGs apiece in other shows, but couldn't get them to accept.

    What I am saying is the technology is there, it's proven, they have enough experience with it to know how to do it, and it's now essentially bug-free, and it makes no sense that the industry is not using it. It would create a cottage industry within DBS that was nothing but a profit center. Free money for everybody! (Sorry, sounding a bit like Bernie Sanders).
     
  10. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I disagree. The DVR inserted commercials that DISH sends to their receivers to be inserted in programming are set with air dates. If the air dates expire then the commercial is not inserted. Either some other commercial is inserted or the underlying spot sent at the time of the DVR recording is seen. DISH does not insert out of date commercials at a later date.

    I am sorry if you are confused by the use of the word "cable" but I was referring to "cable" channels as opposed to broadcast channels. The rules and treatment of those channels are different. "Cable" channels have the special commercial breaks where cable and satellite providers can insert their own ads. Broadcast channels do not. The satellite companies (both DISH and DIRECTV) are using those breaks for DVR inserted advertising ... ads that are inserted in the customer's home by the equipment installed at the customer's home. I do not know if cable is doing DVR inserted ads or not ... I was only speaking to what I know - satellite providers *ARE* using ads inserted in the customer's home and they are current ads.

    For DISH, DIRECTV or cable systems to cover up other commercials (not just the special commercial breaks) would require the permission of the channels. They have been given permission to cover the special breaks, but not all breaks.
     
  11. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,042
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    The problem with satellite was they are national and couldn't show the same commercials as the cable Company's version of the channel because they had local ads. Now they can show those same local ads instead of the national ones. They both also have had space to show their own commercials which they are now also populating with local commercials it seems.

    I've seen nothing to suggest they are or are not showing the local Ads over the available national ones like a cable company and I'll likely never be able To really tell since I'm in Los Angeles. But it wouldn't surprise me if channels let them insert these local ads over the national ones (which really simply means a lower replay rate on many ads not a disappearance of their ads altogether) so they can be on par with the local cable company and make more money overall.

    Channels have always wanted local commercial spots on satelites other wise they wouldn't have the ability today.
     
  12. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Most of the commercial breaks on "cable" channels are filled by the channel itself. Those commercials are seen regardless of what system delivers the channel to the customer (or, if recorded, when it is watched).

    As TomCat noted, the channels and cable systems came up with a way to insert local commercials into cable feeds decades ago. Originally it relied on touch tones to trigger the inserts. The cable system headend would switch over to their local commercials then switch back to the national feed. Technology has improved but satellite and cable still insert commercials at the headend. (Ever see a commercial for another channel on DIRECTV that told you just the DIRECTV channel number?)

    The next step is adding local ads ... and on satellite that requires a DVR to store the local ad in advance and play it back in place of the headend inserted ads. That option is not available on non-DVRs.

    While watching "cable" channels did you see any political ads leading up to the California primaries? Specific commercials referring to voting in California? If you did, then chances are those were DVR inserted. Customers in some markets have reported seeing targeted political ads ... as well as other local advertising that were not aired nationally.

    If you are not seeing anything local either you are not watching on a DVR or your provider has been unable to sell commercials in your market. Which would be strange for a large market but perhaps the rates are too high. Or perhaps you are just really good at skipping commercials. In any case, local DVR inserts are being done by DIRECTV.
     
  13. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,042
    1,569
    Nov 13, 2006
    You basically repeated what I said with different words. Not sure why.
     
  14. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,894
    2,270
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Perhaps your words were unclear ... but as long as you agree with what I wrote at least we are on the same page. Perhaps other readers will understand your wording better than mine.
     
  15. TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    I guess my words were unclear to James also, but peace, I enjoy the back and forth, and it heartens me that you guys actually think this conversation is fun.

    Now that Zuckerberg is planning telepathy as a path for Facebook, the future of advertising seems even a little more scary. That was not a typo. Yep. Telepathy.
     
  16. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,488
    449
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I try not to roll my eyes at some of the things these young dot.com billionaires say. I tried to understand the thinking in this article Mark Zuckerberg says the future of communication is telepathy. Here’s how that would actually work. which included this graphic...

    [​IMG]

    ...and found myself wondering not whether it could work but why anyone would willingly embrace what Mr. Nerd 7.0 said:

    Not only won't people talk to each other, but they won't type a "up to 140 characters" tweet. They'll just send "full rich thoughts" after they reteach themselves to think beyond 140 characters at a time. Or maybe they'll just flood the "telepathynet" with the typical dumb and dumber thinking, abandoning all "full rich thoughts" learned from reading great books. Yeah, color me a cynic about how tech gets used.
     
  17. Nick

    Nick Charter Gold Club Member DBSTalk Club

    22,055
    270
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    I just thought you a message, think me back.
     
  18. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,488
    449
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Yup. [​IMG]
     
  19. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,643
    397
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Hopefully that never becomes a real thing... You'd have to block everyone from just planting the worst thoughts in your head... Imagine just Facebook... but instead of the comments section... these random thoughts/responses would pop into your head and you couldn't un-know them!
     
  20. TomCat

    TomCat Broadcast Engineer

    4,153
    101
    Aug 31, 2002
    Twitter is sort of like a preview of what that world would be like. Everyone always found comfort in the fact that no one could attack you for a thought in your head (even child molesters and misogynists and racists).

    But now, people have problems not sharing their thoughts with the entire universe at the drop of an iPad, and are regularly getting excoriated for it. What will things be like when they don't even have to go to the effort of typing anymore? What if hackers replace your thought with a spoofed thought which makes someone think you thought something that you didn't?

    Adobe Premiere has a service that news organizations can buy for under a grand that will allow them to search an AUDIO database, such as their entire stock footage library, for anyone saying a phrase, or a word. It's pre-indexed so you can find any audio reference in your video library of any person saying a particular phrase, and it returns hits from 30,000 stored clips in under a second. That means that anything you ever say on the record is at the fingertips of every idiot news producer in every TV station, forever. No clever hot-shot reporter has to even remember what you said nine years ago anymore.

    That's not scary if you don't ever speak on camera. But the government has this, too. So not to go all tinfoil hat here, but if the NSA has a recording of every phone call, or God forbid, they have mics in all of our homes (every phone, tablet, laptop, and Amazon Echo has this potential) my advice is to just always keep your mouth closed. Even in the privacy of your own home.

    But then I have great difficulty following my own advice, ironically enough.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements