PDA

View Full Version : NBC Tells Wall Street 25-54 Demo, Not 18-49 Is Its Bottom Line


kechara420
10-09-2003, 07:14 AM
http://www.mediapost.com/dtls_dsp_news.cfm?newsId=221771

Thursday, Oct 09, 2003
NBC Tells Wall Street 25-54 Demo, Not 18-49 Is Its Bottom Line
by Paul J. Gough

For years, NBC’s central marketing pitch to advertisers, agencies, TV critics and the trade press alike has been the value of the network’s adult 18-49 audience. It has even gone so far as to proclaim it is the only demo that really counts on Madison Avenue. But on Wednesday, the peacock network revealed its real demographic bottom line to Wall Street: adults 25-54.

During a conference call discussing its merger with Vivendi Universal Entertainment (see related story in today’s MediaDailyNews) with analysts and investors, NBC management chose used the older demographic break to illustrate what the General Electric unit termed the “Ad Sales Opportunity” in the merger. The presentation included a slide presentation highlighting the relative adult 25-54 cost per thousands on NBC’s broadcast and cable TV units, as well as its newly acquired USA Network and Sci Fi Channel assets.

That those cable networks index at 27% to 30% of the advertising value of NBC is not as surprising as the fact that NBC chose to use the adult 25-54 break to illustrate the point (see below).

Demo Graphic: What NBC Touts To Wall Street

--------------------CPM 25-54----------------------
Index

Sci Fi USA Bravo MSNBC CNBC NBC
27 30 34 40 77 100


Source: NBC’s Oct. 8 presentation to Wall Street analysts. Index base = 2002-03 season.
The presentation showed a different face than the one NBC normally portrays to the ad industry and the difference may not simply be hypocrisy. It may signal and fundamental shift in the company’s positioning.

If so, NBC sales management will have a lot of explaining to do. As recently as its 2003-04 upfront sales pitches, the network was still harping on the notion that adults 18-49 are the ruling demographic buy, something NBC would often chide the relatively older skewing CBS about. During its upfront presentation NBC late night talk show host Jay Leno quipped CBS’ idea of 18-49 meant viewers who were born between 1918 and 1949.

CBS executives routinely report on total households and adults 25-54 rather than the adults 18-49 favored by NBC, Fox and ABC. NBC, which has led the season ratings in adults 18-49 as well as 25-54 while at the same time ceding total households and viewership to CBS, has in the past focused on 18-49.

“Everything they usually talk about with NBC is 18 to 49,” acknowledged Sam Armando, director of television research at Publicis’ Starcom Worldwide unit. But he noted that when talking about the diverse nature of the group of networks that will come under the wing of NBC Universal – not only NBC, CNBC, MSNBC and Bravo but also Sci Fi, USA Network and Trio – the adults 25-54 demographic might make more sense.

“The common thread of these networks is [adults] 25-54,” Armando said.

Steve Sternberg, senior vice president and director of audience analysis at Magna Global USA, said the 25-54 demo is just as important as 18-49.

“It makes sense for a network, whose cable properties include the older- skewing CNBC, MSNBC and Bravo, would look at 25-54 on a corporate basis,” Sternberg said.

Sternberg noted that with the exception of its Thursday primetime lineup, NBC has been skewing older anyway. According to a Magna Global analysis of Nielsen Media Research data, NBC’s median age was 46.2 between October 2002 and May 2003, compared to 52.2 for CBS, 43.6 for ABC and 35.0 for Fox. But NBC has trended older in recent years, moving from a median age of 43.4 in 1998-99. Importantly, so has the United States population.

“The median age is the oldest it’s ever been. That’s where the people are. Maybe that’s where the [network’s] target should go,” said Brad Adgate, senior vice president of research at Horizon Media. He and other media people observe that the baby boom generation is boosting the population of 25- to 49- year-olds.

Media agency people say NBC has traditionally hawked its position among adults 18-49 but that it could have done that too, since it has led in the adults 25-54 demographic, as well. With a strong challenge from Fox in adults 18-49 last season and another one expected this year, buyers say it might make sense for them to start talking about other demos.

“It will likely drop out of first place among 18-49 well before 25-54, so it wouldn’t be surprising to see them jump on the 25-54 bandwagon at some point,” Sternberg predicted.

If NBC is becoming a recent convert to the wisdom of targeting adults 25-54, they’re going to find stiff competition from CBS, which has been staking its position there for several years now. One of the hottest topics at the summer’s Television Critics Association conference in Los Angeles was CBS presentation of a study of media planners and buyers it conducted with MediaPost Communications, publisher of MEDIA Magazine and MediaDailyNews. The study found planners and buyers see the adults 25-54 demographic as the most important target when purchasing commercial television. Buyers and planners believe the aging of the population – the number of Baby Boomers who are in the demographic – is having a major impact.

David Poltrack, executive vice president of strategy and research at CBS, said realizing the impact of the Baby Boom generation is key. And as the Boomers age, their power in the marketplace is reflected in the older demo. Poltrack thinks a better measure of the marketplace is to stop focusing on adults 18-49 and either measure 25-54 or perhaps adults 18-54.

Poltrack said NBC had its reasons for touting adults 18-49.

“It serves them better to continue to talk about 18-49 as opposed to 25-54 because that’s the demographic where they can distance themselves to the greatest degree with CBS,” Poltrack said. He said other networks, like Fox and ABC, are both stronger in adults 18-49 than they are in 25-54 and it’s in their best interests to focus on 18-49.

Yet given strong challenges to NBC’s dominance among adults 18-49, Poltrack believes NBC might change its tune.

“They’re starting to lose some of that 18-49 advantage,” he noted. “They may now realize that, ‘Gee, we should talk about the fact that we’re number one in 25-54.’”

Horizon’s Adgate doesn’t see a seismic shift in TV toward 25-54, even if NBC moves toward that as its main measure. “I can’t see Fox or The WB going after adults 25-54 just because NBC does,” he said.

In the future, said Adgate, the demographic squabbles might be moot. He sees a future, with more sophisticated research and database marketing technology enable media buyers to focus on media targets that go well beyond age and sex.

“Maybe we’ll see less of an emphasis on demographics because we’re going to have information that’s going to show buyergraphic,” Adgate said. “That may change the model a bit.”

Poltrack agrees, and he’s championed that idea in articles he’s written for the Journal of Advertising Research.

“Age is not the right demographic. Forget what age,” Poltrack said. “There are other demographics such as income, or household size. Income is a more relevant demographic than age for higher impact.” NBC executives were not available for comment.

AnnieBW
10-09-2003, 08:03 PM
It's about time! The line that fans have been hearing for YEARS now is that the only relevant demographic was teenagers. Look at the top shows - most of them are watched by older audiences.

The fact that Farscape appeals to all demographics is something in our favor. Time to start dragging out the statistics that we compiled and send them to NBC management.

- Annie

waltersgirl
10-09-2003, 11:59 PM
The study found planners and buyers see the adults 25-54 demographic as the most important target when purchasing commercial television. Buyers and planners believe the aging of the population – the number of Baby Boomers who are in the demographic – is having a major impact.

hmmm.

grapeshot
10-10-2003, 11:04 AM
The study found planners and buyers see the adults 25-54 demographic as the most important target when purchasing commercial television. Buyers and planners believe the aging of the population – the number of Baby Boomers who are in the demographic – is having a major impact.

Well, duh!

VBKatLou
10-10-2003, 01:04 PM
ditto grapeshot. :aok:

akimbo
10-10-2003, 06:33 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study found planners and buyers see the adults 25-54 demographic as the most important target when purchasing commercial television. Buyers and planners believe the aging of the population – the number of Baby Boomers who are in the demographic – is having a major impact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So how much money did they spend on this study? :trout:

Antrobus
10-11-2003, 07:37 AM
Interesting - thanks for posting!

canadadoc
10-11-2003, 08:37 AM
As a member of this "older" demographic I have been wondering for ages why "we" are so left out of the loop in ratings value. I can't speak for all members of my similiar age group of course but many of us are looking for high quality programming and will not think twice about buying it.

If I want a DVD (movie or TV series) I will buy it . When new Farscape is shown someday on a particular channel I will find a way to get that channel. Or I will just buy episodes on a pay channel. I am not alone I am sure.

I am wondering if a return to higher quality will be a driving force in entertainment on TV again?? My generation grew up in the early days of TV - so some of us wouldn't mind enjoying it again.

I also don't mean to offend any of the younger or older demographic - many others are waiting for the return of high quality programming.

The problem is that there is little of high quality on TV to spend my time or money on. Is it possible that the industry may finally be getting the point and may start creating it ?

Thanks again for the post.

c.

kechara420
10-11-2003, 11:32 AM
In a way, I suppose I can sort of understand why kids--especially teens--are an attractive market.

1. They have less income, but virtually all of it is *disposable* income--unlike those of us who have credit card bills, mortgages, car payments, etc.

2. Networks and advertisers also want to get consumers while they're young, and build a relationship so that as those viewers/consumers get older, they will stick with the products and brands they grew up on.

3. Kids/teens are more driven by fads and what's "in" than many adults are. It's easier to sell a so-so product/show because it's "in," even if it's not of superior quality, etc.

That being said ... I fully believe that this trend was taken *WAY* too far, and I'm glad to see that it may be starting to change!!

canadadoc
10-11-2003, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by kechara420
In a way, I suppose I can sort of understand why kids--especially teens--are an attractive market.

1. They have less income, but virtually all of it is *disposable* income--unlike those of us who have credit card bills, mortgages, car payments, etc.

2. Networks and advertisers also want to get consumers while they're young, and build a relationship so that as those viewers/consumers get older, they will stick with the products and brands they grew up on.

3. Kids/teens are more driven by fads and what's "in" than many adults are. It's easier to sell a so-so product/show because it's "in," even if it's not of superior quality, etc.

That being said ... I fully believe that this trend was taken *WAY* too far, and I'm glad to see that it may be starting to change!!

Thanks kechara and I agree. I am glad to see that the trend may be changing. I do have a few points to add.

Teens may have less income but guess where they find it ? From parents! I may not have a huge influence on my kids (nor do I expect to) but they do consider my opinions seriously for some viewing/entertainment choices.

Speaking of disposable income there are many on the older edge of the demographic (baby boomers)with a fair amount of disposable income to spend on ourselves. Debts are paid and kids are raised. We have nothing much to spend it on because we are looking with little success for quality. (this applies to many other products other than entertainment including clothing, leisure products and even food).

True about networks getting us when we are young- but they had me hooked a long time ago and then lost me by ignoring my interests and dumbing down the shows they offered.

Yes - younger people may be more likely to follow trends, after all that is the fun of youth - but so do I - just more fussy re quality. LOL

I am always amazed how the industry has lately ignored it's earliest fans who are now old enough to afford many of it's advertised products.

Now back to my regular soapbox.

c.

Antrobus
10-11-2003, 07:38 PM
It seems to me that there was a time - about 20 years or so ago -when there was quality TV and lots of people DID watch it.

For instance, PBS's "The Jewel In The Crown" was a wonderful piece of television and I believe it drew a big audience. Would it today? Probably not. :(

Sometimes I feel that there are just too many channels out there trying to fill their screens 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Therefore we get tons of "crap". If the field were slimmed down we might get higher quality shows. Just a hypothesis!

MediaSavant
10-11-2003, 07:42 PM
The thing about this whole issue is that it oversimplifies the entire advertising industry. If you got a chance to walks the halls of a major agency, you'd find almost a different target audience for each brand or product category. At best, "Adults 25-54" is a plurality rather than a majority.

You will find many categories targeting older consumers--financial services, pharmaceuticals, travel destinations are prominent examples. And CBS with it's 50+ median age seems to be getting plenty of advertising, don't you think? How about CNN? The median age of its viewers is over 60. No advertising there, right? Wrong.

Do you honestly think the following brands all have the exact same target audiences?

Mattel Barbie
Gerber Baby Food
KFC
Merrill Lynch
Viagra
Pepsi

Twich
10-11-2003, 07:47 PM
But television executives consistently shoot for that same category. And NBC, CBS, and ABC aren't looking for CNN's audience...are they?

This whole thing is a bit too mind boggling for me at this time of night...except that my favorite shows (which I DO think about..and ENJOY needing to think about) all seem to be going down the tubes if they aren't already.

Everyone seems to think we need dumbing down....maybe the people in charge of the networks are the same ones that do the warning labels on like...a box of cheese? You know..."Do not stuff up nose..may cause congestion" or whatnot. :rolleyes:

Antrobus
10-12-2003, 10:35 AM
For those who understand advertising better than I do, I have a question. Why does the glucose monitoring meter company (don't recall their name - the ad with Wilfred Brimley) advertise on SciFi?

Everytime I see that when it airs during Farscape, I wonder "what the hell"?

If there's a method to the advertising madness, then what gives with that company showing ads on SciFi?

Do most SciFi fans have diabetes??!!

canadadoc
10-12-2003, 01:05 PM
MediaSavant - thanks for the input re advertising. I agree that the entire discussion simplifies the issue-but then how else to deal with it? I know nothing about the advertising industry and was only speaking as a consumer of a certain age who feels left out . Perhaps I was hoping to reach one of those agencies so they could find me a brand. I was actually speaking more of offering me good TV - but of course that is tied into my market value to be targeted to buy something that can pay for the show.

I did answer Coke,Levis and Tide to those branding questions. Several of my younger relatives are those challenging New Aquarians. LOL

Actually Barbie,Baby food, KFC, Merrill Lynch,Viagra and Pepsi could all appeal to the same person for a multitude of reasons. Our professional lives and our personal lives coexist and can determine what we buy for our company/hospital/volunteer agency as well as ourselves,our children and grandchildren/pets. This industry that thinks they can brand us by age may be really off base at times. I really do think they are ignoring/missing a large number of the older demograhic who have plenty of money to spend with varied needs and interests.

Twich - I do agree that the further dumbing down of what is offered seems to be true. This applies to movies as well - at least mainstream North America .

Antrobus - well lots of people of all ages use glucometers from children to pregnant woman to older diabetics. Diabetes will be or already is the new epidemic of North America - so those advertisers are very smart to get the brand of their particular machine on everyone's mind sooner. After all you may want to buy your Mom or Grandfather one for Xmas?

I am still hopeful that, in spite of the complexity issues, that older consumers looking for quality will soon find it offered. I also hope that this will be true for younger TV watchers too.

Until then there are books, DVDs, the stage and film festivals.

c.

MediaSavant
10-13-2003, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Antrobus
For those who understand advertising better than I do, I have a question. Why does the glucose monitoring meter company (don't recall their name - the ad with Wilfred Brimley) advertise on SciFi?

Everytime I see that when it airs during Farscape, I wonder "what the hell"?

If there's a method to the advertising madness, then what gives with that company showing ads on SciFi?

Do most SciFi fans have diabetes??!!

No, but they may think SciFi has demographics that match people with diabetes.

I don't know the ad. Is it a direct response ad with an 800 number to respond to? Was it in the daytime Farscapes or the midnight ones? Was this the only channel that ad appeared on or one of many? If you had a list of all the channels it appeared on, you can tell a pattern for the demographics.

These are questions that may help lead anyone to the reasons that ad was there.

Direct response, for instance, plays by different rules. They judge where they put their advertising on a "cost per response" basis rather than demographics. They occasionally test new vehicles to determine what response they get. If it's good, they keep with that vehicle.

The daypart you are seeing the ads matters since the viewership profile can change by time of day.

MediaSavant
10-13-2003, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by canadadoc
MediaSavant - thanks for the input re advertising. I agree that the entire discussion simplifies the issue-but then how else to deal with it? I know nothing about the advertising industry and was only speaking as a consumer of a certain age who feels left out . Perhaps I was hoping to reach one of those agencies so they could find me a brand. I was actually speaking more of offering me good TV -

I see you are from Canada. I don't claim any knowledge of what TV is available in Canada.

I have a different opinion of TV in the US, though. I happen to think there is a lot of good TV now for people of all age groups. But, there is a lot of TV period. The average household now gets 102 channels. There's going to be a lot of bad TV, too.

But, I watch only about 10-12 hours of TV week and, managing it with my TiVo, I would say that every single hour I watch is good TV. If I watched 30 hours a week, which is the average for a U.S. viewer, I might not be able to say that.

CBS, for instance, does not target younger viewers and they have a few shows that are surprisingly good. I happen to think "The Guardian", "CSI", and "Without a Trace" are pretty good TV.

Now, you may not like those particularly shows, but what one likes is a personal preference thing. I can admire a show and acknowledge it's considered "good"(West Wing, for example) and still not watch it myself.

Selena
10-13-2003, 08:07 AM
Seems to me that the 'older' demographic is only an issue when they are spending their hard earned.
The rest of the time it's the younger generation that gets all the attention.

canadadoc
10-13-2003, 08:31 AM
MediaSavant - again thanks for your insight and knowledge of the subject - helps me take the emotional rant out of my argument. I think that I am often whining that I want more good things to watch but don't necessarily go actively looking for it - just hope it will appear on network tv. TiVo is probably the option I should seek - not so sure it is easy for me to obtain.

I think that in Canada you can find most of the US TV shows with upgrading cable, dishes etc - I haven't bothered except to immediately add the cable channel that gave me the rest of Farscape! Most good shows appear later on one of our channels- for example Six Feet Under and Sopranos can be seen on regular cable channels several seasons behind. But no one is stopping us from purchasing HBO.

You have a good point re CBS - "Without a Trace" is a show that appeals to me although CSI (TOS) has recently tried too hard for the gore factor, which I assume is to pull in younger viewers.IMHO

Of course many TV shows are made in Canada - and the local programs - such as DaVinci's Inquest are better than most seen on US TV.

There still is the problem that quality programs do struggle to stay on the air unless they use some gratuitous gimmick to draw in certain viewers - the open blouses on female crime scene investigators for example! Or unnecessary gore !

I guess that I will take some comfort in the fact that the demographic emphasis may be moving a little in what is offered. I look forward to that- and more Farscape.

Thanks again for your informed comments.

c.

Antrobus
10-13-2003, 09:01 AM
Back to the glucometer ad thing - which really isn't worth a lot of anybody's time.

Of course I know not all SciFi fans are diabetics. I asked that question "tongue in cheek". I've worked in a clinical laboratory setting for 25 years, so diabetes is well known disease state to me.

However, I just find the company's use of Wilfred Brimley odd if they're trying to attract an all encompassing age group. It really looks like an ad that would be shown with an elderly population in mind.

That being said, I don't think elderly people are watching the SciFi Channel Sunday nights at midnight during a Farscape episode. I was taping the first episodes of Season 4 because I didn't have them on tape yet and this commercial airs at least once during that Sunday late night showing.

I don't think there was an 800 number listed, but I can't really say without seeing the add again.

Anyway, seeing this add with an elderly man like Brimely show up on a late Sunday night broadcast of Farscape just seemed like it was not reaching its intended audience. It seemed like SciFi was just plugging it in any old place because they had to.

PicassosLaughing
10-13-2003, 09:18 AM
For lively discussion and great information, this is the board to be on.

Most read but don't often post, thanks for the debate.

canadadoc
10-13-2003, 09:45 AM
Antrobus - LOL maybe some old people need less sleep so watch Farscape reruns - maybe diabetics of all ages tend to stay up late! LOL

Actually I can't get the Sci Fi channel so haven't seen where the ad is placed. That aside - the ad is shown up here -can't recall where or when. I personally agree that Wilfred Brimley would not be my first choice to sell glucometers. But I am sure that the advertisers used focus groups to check on his charm at appealing to potential users/buyers of the product. After all he does have warm and fuzzy going for him. Perhaps the Santa thing for Xmas glucometer gift giving. LOL

Sci FI may have discovered that older or perhaps sicker (not implying that diabetics are sick by the way) or more health conscious people watch FS late at night. Maybe people in hospital waiting rooms watch Sci Fi late at night. Maybe diabetic shift workers watch the show. Who knows.

Perhaps Sci Fi is after all trying to appeal to the older demographic. LOL

All I will say is whoever manages to get the branding of glucometers will be a rich company!! Not that I know anything about the ad industry.

Great discussion but drifting OT I guess.

c.