I keep hearing people on radio/TV say traditional TV commercials are ruined because everyone uses a DVR to skip commercials. It's annoying me.
People who have DRV's may use them to skip commercials but not many people have DVRs! Our class did a poll and found 6% had a DVR. According to Magna Global, 16% of US households will have DVRs by the end of 2006, which means it is less than that now. In other words, the vast majority of people are not skipping commercials because they dont have DVRs.
The other thing that really annoys me about DVR's is that companies have not used them to harness data. If you watch TV with a DVR, that machine knows EXACTLY what you watch, when you watch it including what commercials you watch and which ones you skip. Forget those silly "notebooks" for Nielsen ratings - this is incredibly precise data on actual consumer TV behavior.
As far as I know cable companies charge a monthly fee for using a DVR. Companies could waive this fee in return for the consumer data and then turn around and sell that data for much more. (Would TIVO have been a successful company if they had positioned themselves as a data company, like Nielsens?)
We would all be better off with accurate data instead of all these guesses about DVR's and commercials. With real feedback data, they might even be able to make better commercials, commercials that people enjoy and respond to.
Frankly this whole industry is very disappointing in how slow it is adapting to new technology. Instead of resisting DVR's like the devil (and pissing off consumers in the process), broadcasters could be looking for ways to offer new features. I know this rarely happens in practice but it is still a shame.
As a computer with a hard drive and network connectivity, a DVR is a terrific platform for creating individual content. In stead of broadcasting a single signal for everyone, they could could work on programming that YOU want to see along with advertising that YOU might care about. Personalizing advertising is what is making Google so much money. It is about time it happened on "TV" as well.
Things change people. Get creative already.
In DVR Pricing Row, Advertisers Win First Round
Negotiations Pick Up Steam In Sign Networks May Have Eased Up on Their Demands
June 6, 2006
ABC implicitly acknowledged its DVR retreat in a statement yesterday, noting that "the majority of the advertising community has reached a consensus" on the DVR issue "and has concluded that commercials seen during a DVR-recorded programming have no value." ABC added that it "continues to believe strongly" in the worth of such viewers and "will continue its efforts to include this audience."
Indeed, it isn't a fight that the networks can afford to abandon. By the end of this year, 16% of households with TVs will have DVRs, estimates Interpublic Group's Magna Global. Networks face a tough future if they can't get advertisers to pay for viewers using these devices says one ad executive who focuses on media. "Once you say, 'OK, we agree, if it's delayed, we don't get paid,' you are automatically building in a loss of audience each year," says Larry Spiegel, a principal at Richards Group, an independent Dallas agency.
The bottom line, as Ed Gentner, a senior vice president at Publicis Groupe's MediaVest says, is this: "Yes, there is some value in DVR exposure, but we don't have enough data to really know exactly what that value is. Until we can quantify with certainty what that value is, no one wants to pay up for it."
