Posts filed under 'Digital Signage ROI'
The current economic downturn, call it recession or not, forces marketers to re-prioritize their media spend in favor of more measurable vehicles. Ad Age has talked to some top media buyers and sellers about how they expect to survive through the slowdown. I tried to summarize it below.
Network TV’s share will most likely keep shrinking in favor of cable, which offers lower CPM and better targeting.
Digital categories such as email and search will continue to be strong, regardless of the economy, with search marketing being the most recession-proof channel, because it is more measurable than other media and because it’s so closely tied to sales (especially in case of e-commerce). “Digital, in general, does not feel the effects initially because in tough economic times, there is a flight to measurable media,” said Bryan Wiener, CEO of digital agency 360i, in his interview to Ad Age.
Local radio spending will remain stable and might even benefit from the difficult times. Rex Conklin, media director of Wal-Mart Stores, said Wal-Mart already has started using radio for more efficient media spending in the wake of economic recession. “Particularly in a down economy, the advantages of radio are significant in that it’s very local and very flexible, which is incredibly important, especially when you’re talking about pricing.”
Newspapers face some pretty grim business trends, but the outlook will darken further in recession. “It will cut both ways,” said Jason Klein, president-CEO of the Newspaper National Network, a partnership of 24 newspaper companies that helps marketers place national buys. “It clearly is bad news for classified, which is not a good story in any economy for newspapers.” Help-wanted and real-estate listings in particular, which are already bruising papers by migrating to the web, will become scarcer in an economic downturn.
Magazines might need to rely on their web sites, according to Ad Age: “…web sites that can attract ad revenue even in tough times, partly because of low rates and partly because digital remains sexy to advertisers.”
Out-of-home — thanks to new digital and video technologies — has started to take a larger percentage of media budgets, beyond just a portion of what marketers set aside for nontraditional media. However, the potential economic downturn could leave the fate of some of those budgets in limbo. “I hope this recession doesn’t cause clients to exercise cancellation clauses,”Jack Sullivan, senior VP-out-of-home-media director for Starcom told Ad Age.
So-called shopper marketing already was booming, with Deloitte Consulting and the Grocery Manufacturers of Association projecting growth of 20% or more this year, but the downturn may not bring any extra boost, reports Ad Age.
“As consumers get more frugal, CPGs will shift their media to things that have a more immediate return on investment,” Mr. Garga said. “Shopper marketing is a captive audience in the store with an immediate effect. … Online is a medium, too, that supports more value-oriented messages.”
I would add that overall, digital signage, being the driver of growth behind both Out-of-home advertising and shopper marketing, is well-positioned to weather the storm. Such factors as slow but steady aggregation of digital signage ad space and development of standards and metrics are adding to its strength and will eventually make it easier for marketers to divert budgets from network TV and newspapers to this new medium.
February 19th, 2008
Analysts at Yahoo Finance and MediaPost’s Search Insider predict a slowdown in ad spending on traditional media. Both observers, however, are confident that the recession will not affect online advertising, which has been expanding healthily in 2007.
While traditional media is hurt by such factors as the general economic slump, the housing crisis, the writers’ strike and continuing fragmentation of its declining audience, “… the explosive growth of ad networks—firms that place advertising on websites—will make it easier for advertisers to spend money on the internet,” says the author of Five Media Trends in 2008.
According to Mark Simon of Search Insider: “Projections for overall online ad spend for 2008 remain rosy, even as every leading macroeconomic indicator points to a recession ahead. Finance alone makes up 33% of the overall $275 billion online ad spending pie (according to eMarketer.com). You can’t tell me that this sector can take a huge hit without having a big impact on both the search and display market. But online media remains so cheap that the bulk of any spending pullback will hit other channels harder, including offline and high CPM online media.”
What about digital signage? If we sum up the trends we covered in our previous posts (see the Big Picture category), we’ll see that:
- In-store media (shopper marketing) is growing faster than the Internet
- Outdoor advertising is growing almost as fast as the Internet and will be further boosted by the recent US legislation permitting digital billboards
- US consumers are spending twice as much time away from home than they did 30 years ago, and the average daily commute has doubled to about an hour
- The traditional media ad budgets started to be diverted to digital signage ad space even without waiting for the standardized metrics
- Standards and metrics for out-of-home video (aka digital signage) networks are being developed by big players such as Nielsen, Arbitron, POPAI, OVAB and others…
- Many retail chains are trying to reduce the static ad clutter by re-engineering store interiors and letting digital screens in
- There is an explosive increase in inquiries about digital signage from advertisers, media buyers, agencies and retailers
- New trade shows and portals dedicated to digital signage are popping up almost every month
- There is a steep rise in mergers, acquisitions and IPOs in the field of digital signage
All of the above factors make me believe that the digital signage trade will not be in trouble in 2008, and most probably will continue to advance, filling the void left by traditional media.
On this high note I wish everyone a great New Year and I will return from vacation on January 09.
December 28th, 2007
eMarketer forecasts that out-of-home video advertising spending in the US will total $2.25 billion in 2011, up from $1.26 billion in 2007. The growth is fuelled mainly by introduction of digital, video and wireless technologies that are redefining this “old medium”, says the latest report by eMarketer.
The report’s summary points out the following factors contributing to the rise of the out-of-home video advertising (aka digital dignage) market:
THE GROWTH
Outdoor advertising benefits from fragmentation of traditional media audiences and changing media consumption patterns, and, unlike TV or radio is “immune to channel or Web surfing”.
Due to the new technologies, “out-of-home video advertising networks will comprise the largest component of what is described as the “alternative” out-of-home advertising sector.”
According to eMarketer, US outdoor advertising revenues will rise from $6.8 billion in 2006 to $10.2 billion in 2011.
“The falling costs of flat panel LCDs, combined with the emergence of IP and wireless Internet technology” will continue to drive the out-of-home video advertising market. Another significant driver of the sector is the fact that “US consumers are spending twice as much time away from home than they did 30 years ago, and the average daily commute has doubled to about an hour” (Source: Veronis Suhler Stevenson), says the eMarketer report summary.
The growth trend is also confirmed in the Tech Sector Outlook 2008: Part 2 – a report by Standard and Poor’s. Despite “… a deceleration in U.S. growth and notable opportunities abroad,” the analysts “… also expect emerging areas of digital advertising, such as video and mobile marketing, to contribute more materially to revenues.”
NO METRICS YET
Numerous sources also state that the expansion of new media such as Internet and out of home advertising could have been faster if marketers had a set of agreed-upon reliable metrics to gauge the performance of ads.
Unlike traditional media, where each format has one main ratings provider – the Nielsen Co. for television, Arbitron Inc. for radio and so on – there are many sources of data on online audiences. And they frequently conflict, writes Seth Sutel of Associated Press. As for digital signage ad space, the metrics are even further from ideal.
“We need measurement of the audience and their use of the system that’s clear, simple and actionable for a marketer. You need comparability with other media,†said Steve Wadsworth, president of the Walt Disney Co.’s Internet group.
Although the above AP article, published by The San Diego Union Tribune, is focused the challenges of Internet advertising, most of the marketers’ concerns it describes fully apply to digital signage.
The paper quotes Bob Liodice, CEO of the Association of National Advertisers, as saying that “… corporate leaders have been ratcheting up the pressure on marketing departments to justify their ad budgets with hard proof that they are generating business.”
Advertisers seem fed up with the adage that half their ad spending seems to work; they just can’t tell which half, writes AP:
“CEOs finally said enough is enough,†Liodice said. “We have to know with greater specificity what comes out when something goes in.†— a deep statement… and true… (in relation to digital signage, I mean).
Meanwhile, deciding what exactly to measure would greatly help to determine how to measure it.
The emergence of new media caused a chaos of criteria in the whole marketing chain: from media outlets themselves to media buyers, agencies and their clients: the advertisers.
Accountability (or lack it) is listed in the Advertising Age’s “Trends to Watch in 2008“:
“GET SERIOUS ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY
In ANA’s 2007 marketing accountability study, it was startling to find that, despite enormous efforts, 42% of marketers were dissatisfied with ROI measurements and metrics. In about half of the companies, marketing and finance don’t speak with one voice or share common metrics. Enough! Recognizing the critical importance of accountability, companies will appoint a czar — the chief accountability officer — to lead a disciplined, internally consistent approach to marketing measurements, metrics and productivity.”
Let’s hope at least part of the ROI challenges will be resolved in 2008, so we all could finally start making a lot of money working in digital signage…
Happy New Year!
December 26th, 2007
The fast-expanding “market that includes everything from elevators to urinals” lacks universally recognized metrics, writes Advertising Age. The article points out that some sectors of out-of-home video networks (another synonym for “digital signage”) have been experiencing double-digit growth in recent months; and to sustain this growth, networks need industry-wide metrics.
Ad Age describes individual attempts by networks to bring accountability to the medium by partnering with companies like Nielsen for audience measurements (Ideacast), or by trying to fit into criteria similar to those used by agencies and national advertisers for buying traditional media (SeeSaw). But overall, the author says,  ”those separate efforts don’t really address the need for a system that would allow media buyers to easily compare different offerings.”
The Out-of-Home Video Advertising Bureau (OVAB), formed in January, sees its main goal in bridging this gap. According to OVAB President Kim Norris, the organization intends to create a system that will “look similar to Nielsen’s TV ratings, since the majority of the metrics are impression-based.”
This is certainly a noble mission and accomplishing it will boost the digital signage market dramatically. However, I still see it as an intermediate step towards a metrics system that is more organic to the nature of digital signage, especially in retail. That is, a system based more on “cost-per-transaction” and “cost-per-action”, rather than on “cost-per-impression”. As some analysts predict, impressions will be still be used as a tool to fine tune campaigns if the sales lift numbers do not meet the targets, and for first-time buys.
I would like to mention here our previous posts on the subject: see the Digital Signage ROI category archives.
Â
November 20th, 2007
“The concept is simple: Take the millions of lines of time-stamped playlist data from the signage network, place them alongside the millions of lines of time-stamped sales data from the POS, and compare. Look for patterns that reveal which bits of content are having an impact on sales,” writes James Bickers of Self Service World magazine and digitalsignagetoday.com in his article, recapping the latest approaches to measuring digital signage campaigns effectiveness in retail.
James is focusing on the fact that POS data analysis can help one define which type of content or specific content version resulted in better sales – and I totally agree with that. I would add, however, that, apart from the content, you can also test-change-analyze-change-test, etc. – all kinds of scheduling variations: was the day part picked right?; if there were several day parts, which one worked best?; was the frequency (loop saturation) right? was the overall loop length set right?; did the ad adjacency to other content play any role? did competitive ads or their absence have an impact?, etc.
There is more and more talk nowadays about reinforcing this type of campaign effectiveness analysis, that, by definition, can be done only in e-commerce and in retail digital signage. When such applications are standardized and mass produced they will pave the way for digital sigfnage to become part of mainstream media.Â
November 7th, 2007
Digital outdoor media was further defined and validated as a new and unique medium by outdoor industry visionaries at the Out of Home Advertiser Forum in New York last month. Their analysis was summarized in today’s OAAA newsletter as follows:
• Digital outdoor is not mobile television:
As such, it shouldn’t be used like or created
as television. The message is clear: outdoor
creative requires a unique perspective
and recycled print or television ads
just don’t cut it.
• Digital media’s greatest value is as an ad
delivery device: The speed and flexibility
digital allows enables advertisers to use
outdoor in targeted, time-sensitive ways.
It’s a perspective advertisers have never
had before, and it adds depth and
breadth to their marketing tool kits.
The above are the conclusions CBS Outdoor, Clear Channel and JC Decaux executives came to during a panel discussion at the Out of Home Advertiser Forum, hosted by the OAAA, TAB and ANA, as Nancy Fletcher reports in the newsletter “Outdoor Outlook.”
Answering the question what advertisers really want from Outdoor, another panel stressed the importance of metrics and good content:
• The need for qualitative and ROI research:
Panelists expressed regret because too few
outdoor companies offer research testing
as part of their proposal. Given the sketchy
metrics available for many non-traditional
formats, advertisers have to rely even more
heavily on performance evidence to support
media usage.
• The need for creative assistance:
Advertisers know how hard it is to design
compelling outdoor creative and they want outdoor
companies to assist in this regard, even including
it within a proposal.
According to OAAA’s Nancy Fletcher, the forum participants also reiterated the usual wish list: outdoor media space should be easier to plan, easier to buy and be more accountable.
“The panel consisted of notables – led by ANA President & CEO Bob Liodice, and including David Verklin, CEO of Carat Americas, Doug Checkeris, CEO of Mediacom USA, and Silvia Alvarez, Media Director of Zubi Media,†said the newsletter.
I find that the forum’s insights are highly relevant not only for the digital component of the outdoor media (billboards), but for the digital signage industry as a whole. I would like to emphasize the following three statements in particular:
- Digital outdoor media offers the speed, flexibility and targeting “advertisers have never had before.”
- In the absence of other metrics, advertisers have to rely “even more
heavily on performance evidence to support media usage.”
- Advertisers want assistance in producing good content that will not be recycled print or television ads.
November 5th, 2007
Ken Liao from SeeSaw Networks sent this great response to Daniel Parisien’s post “The Dirty Little Secret of Digital Signage: Proof of Play vs. Audited Proof of Display“:
“Daniel – great topic. We, at SeeSaw, whole-heartedly agree with the industry moving toward much greater accountability. It is refreshing to see your position that proof-of-play goes beyond logs of a playback device and needs to focus on playback at the screen level.
While we generally agree with your four components of an accountable digital signage reporting solution, we would respectfully add two additional factors: traffic and awareness. Traffic is represented the foot traffic passing by a specific location (the potential viewers) and awareness represents the percentage of people that are aware that a digital signage device is in place, displaying content. Everything in the system can operate perfectly, playback on the device is logged correctly, screens are on and displaying ads correctly – but without foot-traffic and awareness, there is no measurement of how many people actually SAW an ad.
By adding these two data components, the advertiser now has a more complete picture of their digital signage campaign’s performance. As Tom (Muniz) mentions, it’s imperative that standards be put forth by those looking to lead this industry.”
I think Ken brings a highly valid point: in order to get reliable impressions numbers, you need to measure the audience and match that data with the proof of play (rather, proof of display, as per Daniel’s definition).
The problem is, in the real world, a lot of networks have neither accurate proof of display stats, nor regularly updated audience measurements. The audience surveys are very expensive and are usually done only once in a few months or once a year at best. So, the accountability becomes fuzzy.
This could be resolved first of all by improving the proof of display reporting process, and, secondly, by implementing digital monitoring of viewership.
Digital cameras that capture every instance of a customer looking at a sign, the duration of eye contact, often even the age, gender and ethnicity of a viewer are already available on the market. The monitoring is real-time, and various types of reports can be generated based on that data. This new technology allows networks to deliver the ad impressions numbers as “hard” data, as opposed to the “soft” data, when only a sample of audience is polled by way of traditional exit interviews and then the results are extrapolated to the whole “universe”.
Such proof of performance can be sufficient to analyze the effectiveness of media spending in a non-retail environment. In retail, however, the ultimate goal is sales lift (see the previous post on the topic), so the campaign performance picture would be completed if sales conversion data is added to the two previous tiers, i.e., proof of display and audience measurements.
Earlier this year I proposed draft definitions of ”the three tiers of accountability” for in-store digital signage:
Tier I:
Proof of ad delivery: How many times was my ad displayed on the targeted screens, in what markets, locations, sites, and over which period of time? Such analysis requires robust proof-of-play reporting mechanisms. This level of accountability is critical for justifying billing per campaign and reconciling invoices. It also facilitates pricing your airtime, if you want to base it on the cost per ad play.
Tier II:
Proof of audience delivery: While my ads were served, how many customers had the opportunity to see them, or actually saw them? The trick here is: you cannot prove audience delivery without having accurate proof of ad delivery first.
Tier III:
Sales uplift measurement. This is the crowning achievement of advertising effectiveness analysis that has become easily available so far only in Internet advertising (when it is combined with e-commerce) and at properly set up in-store digital signage networks. It requires correlation between ad campaign data and POS data.
November 2nd, 2007
… for sales, and, may be, a little bit of branding along the way.
11 out of 12 experts quoted in Laura Davis-Taylor’s article “Branding or Sales Lift? Having it Both Ways” spoke in favor of using in-store digital signage for generating sales lift, while the branding function is performed in the background, as an ancilliary process. The article was published in the October issue of the Marketing At Retail magazine and continued the ’branding vs. sales uplift’ debate that, according to Laura Davis-Taylor, is still raging in the industry.
Frankly, I wonder why the debate is still even on. There are already so many existing vehicles for branding, why misuse digital signage airtime when it is best suited for closing a sale?Perhaps there are a lot of agencies and individuals with deeply vested interests in expanding their branding expertise and services into the lucrative world of retail digital signage. Even then, I see no contradiction here: if branding originates somewhere else, use digital signage to extend that campaign and to actually sell the product. What I don’t see is how digital signage can be used as a primary brand-building vehicle.
My naive thoughts: selling can exist without branding, but can branding exist without selling? And, after all, is there a better way to complete a branding effort than to make a sale?Â
However, I am glad to see that common sense prevails.
Here are some eloquent expert quotes selected by Laura Davis-Taylor, a renowned retail media consultant, from the RetailWire BrainTrust Query results:
Professor John Greening, Sector Head, Advertising; Associate Professor, Medill Graduate School of Integrated Marketing Communications at Northwestern University:
“Marketers need to look at in-store for what it is rather than trying to transfer another medium’s strength and weaknesses onto it. In the store, aperture is different. At home, I’m in ‘lean back mode’ and looking for a distraction. In the store, I’m ‘leaning forward’ and trying to accomplish something-shopping or buying. So, if the media is not helping me do what I need to do while there, it may end up being distracting or aggravating.
The effectiveness of any medium is always the message. So what we need to do is rethink what types of messages we serve up at each point in time of the brand experience. What makes sense in-store? The message of ‘branding’ in-store gets confused because in the glory days of TV we were all about maximum entertainment. Anything price and item or sales focused was seen as sacrificing the brand. Not true if that information is helping me make a decision on the spot in a store.
Valuable, helpful information at the point of purchase builds the brand in a direct way (like direct-response TV does) while still focusing on results generation. And TV entertainment spots (AKA branding messages) are not the kind of messages that will do this. So the answer is that the brand CAN be built in a store…Just in a different way that’s tied to results!â€
Mark Lilien, Retail Technology Group:
“Some marketers push ‘brand-building’ instead of ‘sales’ because deep down they don’t know how to build sales more productively. So they go for the ‘easier goal’: gross rating points. The accusation: it’s easier to buy an audience than to get an audience to buy.â€
Philip Straniero, Executive in Residence, Western Michigan University:
“As a Trade Marketer by profession, I am always slanted to take the side of increased sales lift. This is surely a result of my training and a point of view that in-store investments need to deliver increased sales lift and reach a return on investment hurdle rate. I also think that there are ways that these types of tools can be used to grow brand equity with the consumer but the advertising message must be tailored to an inclusionary (not a primary) focus of the in-store advertising.â€
Bill Robinson, Senior Executive, QuantiSense:
What do shoppers want, especially when they are in the store? In my experience they have very little need to hear about the brand, unless the brand message is tied to something useful. Usually they want some information about a product or a line that they are interested in. Unfortunately, in-store product information is woeful in almost all stores. Product marketers, if you use your new displays and interactive gadgets to provide this type of useful information, sales will increase. And yes, build your brand in the background, unobtrusively.â€
Nikki Baird, Managing Partner, RSR Research:
“In-store digital media is about sales and brand building and entertainment for the shopper. But the implementation costs should be justified by the sales lift alone. If you can get enough value out of your implementation from the promotional opportunities to justify the investment, then the rest – ‘soft’ benefits from a business case perspective – are a bonus.â€
Don Delzell, Principal, Retail Advantage:
I believe that the primary reason sales lift is the dominant use of in-store media is that the brand objective ( at the retailer level) has already been met. The consumer has already chosen to shop there, and the beneficial value of reinforcing the belief system through additional brand message delivery is relatively low – particularly when compared to the opportunity cost of using that time and space for an objective not met.
If the retail brand objective isn’t sustained by the shopping experience, using in-line screens to deliver it isn’t going to change the overall consumer affect. We need to reinvent the content so that it accomplishes both purposes. If the product being presented manifests the brand message (and shouldn’t it?), it is possible to script the content so that both product specific messages and brand reinforcement are delivered.â€
James Tenser, VSN Strategies:
“The shopper media environment offers layers of higher value for brands – measurable interactions, purchases, and repeat purchase behavior – that should be more valuable than gold to brands. Don’t let the glowing screen fool you. This is not TV. Shoppers view in-store media on their feet, in a distracting, highly stimulating environment, while engaged in a utilitarian, decision-intensive chore. If we deliver and document customer actions, ranging from ‘show me more information’ on up to loyal behavior, we should expect brands to pay lavishly.â€
And, finally, as Laura Davis-Taylor put it herself:
“But think about this: Whatever your perception of branding is, it is a means to an end, and that end is sales. Do we spend millions and millions of dollars on marketing to create positive brand perceptions just for fun? No. We do it to ultimately translate into business and dollars. Do stores want to expand on “store as media†just to give people cool places to go? No. They want them in stores and coming back, often buying more. … Branding is one of the many tactics …, but sales will always be the ultimate goal”
I want to thank Sara Dechamps for helping me retype these precious quotes from the hard copy of the magazine.
November 1st, 2007
The traditional “impression”, or “opportunity to see” an ad is no longer enough to prove the efficiency of advertising at retail, says Dick Blatt, President & CEO of POPAI, a point-of-purchase advertising trade organisation. Mr. Blatt told a POPAI digital signage conference in Montreal on Thursday that big advertislng dollars have started to pour into shopper marketing. He cautioned, however, that the problem the industry was facing now was how to keep these budgets in the absense of reliable metrics.
POPAI, among other trade bodies, has been working on establishing metrics to equip advertisers with insights into the real effect of their in-store initiatives.
A recent POPAIÂ MARI Proof of Concept research was the first attempt to measure the level of engagement shoppers have with the marketing-at-retail (MAR) displays.
The research revealed that only 20 percent of the MAR material was passed by shoppers on their journey. Only 4 percent of the material was both passed and seen, meaning that marketing waste in the measured stores was a shocking 96 percent.
POPAI used the findings to establish a new metric: impact ratio, that will be expressed in percentage points and will reflect shopper engagement as opposed to just an “opportunity to see”. The details of the research can be found HERE.
According to Dr. Hugh Phillips, a professor of McGill University who spoke at the same conference, many marketers and retailers are aware of the acute oversupply of advertising messages in stores. There are 4,624 display items in an average-sized supermarket in the UK and 4825 displays in average US stores, with up to 12,000 items in a megastore (POPAI studies). Some chains started cleaning up the store environments by reducing the amount of advertising materials.
Dr. Phillips, an expert on the cognitive psychology of shopping,  said shoppers have developed mechanisms of coping with the clutter by engaging a ‘deselection’ process, shielding themselves from the overload and reacting only to signs of potential relevant information. He found that shoppers may start reading the message only after they have singled it out on a subconscious level, by using indicators like color, shape and size.
The practical conclusion for digital signage networks? Digital signage enters an already busy environment in retail, and, to be successful, entrepreneurs should take the in-store clutter into account. Although digital signs has the unique potential of helping to clear the static display mess and stand out with its full-color and full-motion messages, they will still have to compete with over 35 other types of advertising, and will be perceived according to the same laws of shopper psychology.
In the long run, as Dick Blatt put it, those who understand that digital signage should be treated as ‘just another medium’, and measured as such, will prevail in making it a key part of a marketing mix.
October 26th, 2007
Digital signage ads are less annoying and are more relevant to the viewers than any other types of advertising, a new study by OTX (Online Testing eXchange) revealed.
The results of the study are wrapped up by Marketing Charts:
“Most adults say advertising on digital signage catches their attention – and they consider such advertising unique and entertaining, and less annoying than both traditional and online media, according to a study by OTX (Online Testing eXchange) conducted for SeeSaw Networks.
The “Digital Out-of-Home Media Awareness & Attitude Study†is the first to compare digital out-of-home media to other media, SeeSaw said.
Shortcuts to charts in this article:
- Advertising considered interesting and entertaining, by medium
- Advertising considered annoying, by medium
- Advertising catches attention and is unique, by medium
- Those who pay “some†or “a lot of†attention to advertising on mediumÂ
- Media attributes, 18-34-year-olds vs. general adult population
Among the findings of the study:
- Awareness of digital out-of-home media is high:
- Some 62% of adults have seen digital signage in the past 12 months – levels similar to billboards (66%), magazines (67%) and newspapers (63%).
- That compares with 92% for TV, 75% for radio, 78% for internet and 10% for mobile phones.
- On average, people notice digital signage in six different kinds of locations during their week, giving advertisers the opportunity to intercept people at various touch points.
- Digital out-of-home advertising is engaging:
 
- Respondents found digital signage advertising to be more unique (58%), interesting (53%) and entertaining (48%), and less annoying (26%), than other media.
- Some 63% of those who have seen digital signage say it attracted their attention, compared with 58% for billboards, 57% for magazines, 56% for TV, 47% for internet, 40% for newspaper, 37% for radio and 10% for mobile.
- 44% of adults say they pay some or a lot of attention to digital signage advertising, placing it ahead of traditional billboards, the internet and mobile phones, and on par with magazines, radio and newspapers.
- Reaching young people is a strength of digital out-of-home media:
- 75% of 18-34-year-olds have seen digital signage in the past 12 months and notice digital signage in seven different locations during their week.
- This demographic finds the advertising on digital signage to be more unique (63%), interesting (57%) and entertaining (53%) than advertising on other media and rates the media even higher than the general population across these measures.
Oct 25-07
October 26th, 2007
Next Posts
Previous Posts