It is advertising in the Super Bowl Worth It?

Repeat after me and say it slowly … $ 3 million for a 30-second commercial. Now say it again. $ 3 million for a 30-second commercial. Oops, time. That will be $ 3 million, please. How can one 30-second television ad in the Super Bowl, possibly worth $ 3 million?

But I think it is (as )…. Here's why.

I grew up in the communications industry in the 70 and 80 of BBDO / New York, where the creative ego, and keeping talent, ran wild. BBDO consistently led the major agencies with the highest # of points of customer in the Super Bowl, with Pepsi always in the top of the list. Ironically, Pepsi is no longer a Super Bowl advertiser, nor is the brand Pepsi, BBDO account for longer, maybe there is a correlation. I felt then that advertising in the Super Bowl was a colossal waste of money. The ratings do not justify the expenditure program, and the purchase for most of the ego were expelled. To give credit, it's a great way to kick off a new campaign and companies with money to spend (not a problem in today's economy), had some value. But I still felt it was very expensive relative to the value received since he had a lot of the mega-rated programming.

So how could I say in economics terrible today that advertising in the Super Bowl to $ 3MM a throw-is money well spent. I think so, because the world has changed in two dramatic ways:

1. There is no comparable way to reach a mass audience.

The gap between test scores and ratings for Super Bowl event in another "big" and current prime-time programming has expanded. The Super Bowl is indeed the apex of watching television, and nothing comes close.

There were more ways to reach large audiences of years ago. Media fragmentation yields smaller today, the public more definite, but woe to those marketers who truly seek "mass" is nothing better than the Super Bowl.

2. Not only on the implementation of the points at stake today.

For a television advertiser, the part that really begins the previous week and lasts several days after the actual event. The place on game day is simply through the attendant publicity, talks, and hopefully, and most importantly, YouTube views after the event. In the 80s there was obviously no YouTube and, although there was some publicity, the amount of buzz was much smaller.

What this means is that more than ever if you are an advertiser of the Super Bowl, then the place has to be large, not just good. Because there is nothing worse than spending $ 3 million and then get shut down on Monday to issue a lame piece of creative. And its location should be more than mere efficiency. To justify the hype, we need a "mini-movie" that others will want to watch again and again. Therefore, talking babies, animals, great production, talent, celebrity, etc. should be part of the plan. Can not afford a big blur. Do not play.

But if you hit creative pay dirt and create a place that is a big as the Super Bowl itself, and really want the explosion to reach the largest possible audience, then $ 3 million may be a price to pay.

Go Colts. I would like to be Eli, but at least one envelope will be there.