Responding To Direct TV
The Forte Post House Regents Park provided the comfortable surroundings for Marketing Week’s Direct Response TV conference. Paul Rouse, deputy managing director IMS Group PLC, began his chairman’s opening address by stating that TV is now more accountable than ever before. The following speakers backed up this claim.
Robin Worboys, telemedia consultant at the Sitel Corporation, was the first to take to the podium. DRTV, he stated, depends on the consumers’ ease with the telephone and, since 75% of people are now happy using the phone, DRTV has a growing target audience. Worboys then said that industry segmentation and technological advancement, has allowed DRTV to become increasingly sophisticated and targeted. To the consumer DRTV is convenient and accessible, to business it is cost-effective, measurable and targeted, it sells direct to the consumer via the TV and cuts out the middle men.
Following the business approach through, was where Maria Philips and Bob Nash, creative directors at WWAV Rapp Collins, took up the baton. They both emphasised the importance of creative decisions. “DRTV is not a teaser or an awareness instrument, it is direct response selling across the TV screen. The ad has to make people sit-up and take action. The advertiser demands measurable results, in the form of telephone calls and direct sales. It is, therefore, vital that the phone number is mentioned several times during the ad and is easy to remember. The voice-over, the music and the direction, work in combination to entice the viewer to pick up the dog and bone and chase the carrot at the end of the advertising stick.”
The Rapp Collins team then went on to remind media planners how crucial the positioning of DRTV ads is in the schedule. Research has shown that DRTV ads receive more response if they are shown during ‘boring’ shows, Coronation Street is one of the worse spots for DRTV.
Media planning for TV response was the subject of Rob Sowden’s speech; Sowden is sales manager at the IMS Group PLC. He looked at the different call handling options on the market and the need to choose the right types of response handling for the ad. 37% of DRTV phone-callers get the engaged tone, this gives the company a bad name and is likely to damage the brand image. He went on to discuss the benefits of free and paid phone numbers. A live, as opposed to machine automated, 2 minute call costs the advertiser between £1.00 and £1.50. The general feeling is that consumers are less likely to make the phone call if they have to pay for it, but as Sowden argued, consumers who don’t want to pay for the call are probably not the target audience for direct selling. Freephone numbers are not necessarily more effective.
DRTV, however, is itself nearly always effective, this was Ruth Roscoria’s message to the conference. Roscoria is business development manager at Channel 4. She claims that the DRTV market is now worth £500 million. DRTV is so successful because it allows consumers to identify themselves, it is an active, not passive service. It uncovers new leads and allows to advertisers to build relationships with consumers.
These reasons are likely to have led David Ogilvy to state: “One day all advertising will be response advertising.” Simon Foster, head of DRTV at O&M, brought these wise words to the conference audience. He also predicted that in the future DRTV will be predominate in financial services, travel and technology ads. Drawing on his wide experience with DRTV, Ogilvy said that it essential for agencies to decide what the objective of the ad is. He finished with these wise words: “By going direct you are bringing the virtual shop alive. When consumers respond to you they have chosen to enter your premises. The people who answer the consumer response are your shopkeepers and if the door is locked or the service is poor they will leave you and are unlikely to return.”