[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Neil Williams wrote: > Ads on TV are the only real way of affecting the masses - why else > would the fees be so high? > Radio? I think a large proportion of people also listen to the radio at least on a daily basis. I know I do in the car. BBC notwithstanding commercial radio stations also need advertisers to stay afloat, and they're cheaper than TV. Hell half the time I can tell it's one of the DJs reading the advert, so it's not like they spent the earth on casting :) BTW I spend about 4.5 hours a week in the car, and *maybe* slightly more watching TV. In my case, and maybe others, advertising budgets would go further with radio. http://www.myadbase.com/cgi-bin/guide.cgi?page=radio_advertising £25-£50 a second doesn't sound too onerous to me. Granted you have to create the advert first of all, but the cost associated with that would be much lower too. http://www.myadbase.com/cgi-bin/guide.cgi?page=advertising_radio_station 'For around £1500 you should get a one or two week campaign of three or four 20-30 second slots per day. You can probably negotiate a deal for the production of the audio too and most radio station have numerous contacts in this department.' I can't see a TV ad campaign costing as little as that for the same coverage. In fact: http://www.myadbase.com/cgi-bin/guide.cgi?page=tv_advertising Seems to agree. £1000 per 30 second slot seems roughly equivalent to the radio costs at first glance (multiplying £25-30 * 30), however the bulk price and initial production of the advert would be much lower. From the above quote, a 1 week (7 day) campaign of 3 x 20 seconds per day = 420 seconds. For £1500 this comes to 3.57 pps[1] as opposed to 33.33r pps for TV. Kind regards, Julian [1] pence per second -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html