Retail TouchPoints: Redefining Reach - A New Lens for an Old Media Metric
Through a special arrangement, presented here for discussion is a summary of a current article from the Retail TouchPoints website.
As more retailers embrace the concept of marketing at retail, an interesting recent phenomenon is that of old school media planners struggling to include the store as media. Where they get hung up is defining "reach" within the store.
Wikipedia defines advertising reach as "a measure of the size of an audience." GRP (Gross Rating Point) is how the industry measures reach by a specific media vehicle or schedule. The CPM represents the cost to reach 1,000 people within that vehicle.
Almost all traditional media is defined and measured this way, so it's no surprise that people new to playing within stores inquire about a retailer's in-store GRP and CPM. However, this approach has some big issues.
Recent factors are causing brands to look at new outlets, new vehicles and new methods for connecting with busy, distracted people on the go. Lucky for us, the store was reevaluated as a consumer connection point and folks like P&G helped the industry see that it's actually the richest place to create a relevant dialogue with consumers. Given that a message received in-store is an active one (shoppers respond with an immediate buy), it's shocking that this was big news. Regardless, it has legitimized the store as a healthy piece of the yearly marketing plan.
The issue is that reach, as defined today, is becoming irrelevant. CPG brands I've spoken with don't hesitate to share that they'll pay top dollar for one qualified viewer over 500 unqualified ones. And, when it comes to the store, they care about brand awareness when it supports an ultimate sale.
Shelly Palmer, media guru and host of Digital Life, recently shared that five years ago there were approximately 25,000 broadcasters in the U.S., consisting of about 18,000 radio stations, a couple thousand television stations, and a few thousand multi-systems operators (MSOs). Today, there are more than 150 million broadcasters. His point? Attention is what everyone in the advertising industry packages and sells, yet reach has no direct correlation to attention. Reach is just the potential -- attention is the hopeful outcome.
We need to think about this. I've often asked CPM-insistent media buyers how they will be transacting TV media buys once we start reporting exact commercial viewership at the household level. Then, I ask their clients how they prefer to buy in-store media. In most cases, it's somewhere in between flat sponsor rates, cost per qualified engagement and a revenue share. They're always clear that they are willing to pay premiums based on the level of measurement the retailer is willing to share.
As an ad vet myself, I learned a very valuable lesson years ago: a message that has no relevance to someone is an advertisement; a message of personal relevance is communication. Therefore, reach is not a measurement of potential bodies exposed to an advertisement, but of people who become engaged and absorb a message.
Discussion Questions: Should retailers accept old school "reach" as the metric of value for in-store marketing? Or, should the industry strive for a valuation approach tied to results?
[Author's commentary] The "store as media" is a new concept being overlaid on a very established consumer channel. It indeed opens up a lucrative new revenue stream for retail brands. I simply ask that as we become savvier in the art of "relevant reach," let's try to keep our stores measured by this new school thinking rather than by dying media dogma. Value and measure by message impact -- it's a much better path to happy shoppers, inspired vendor partners and thriving stores.