Here’s a question I’m often asked, in my role as a radio advertising expert who insists that effective radio advertising requires radio commercials that make money for the advertiser:
“But what about ‘institutional’ or ‘image’ advertising?”
Yes, there are some advertisers who are foolish enough to throw their money away on “image” advertising: The local bank that has sponsored the 12 o’clock newscast for the past 50 years…without ever changing their ad copy. They never change the advertising copy because they really don’t care if anyone responds to it.
There’s an oft-repeated story that I have seen attributed to at least three different 20th Century businessmen. The familiar quotation from that businessman is, “Half of my advertising is wasted. But I don’t know which is the half that is wasted.”
For most businesses, that remains the standard: They have no idea which of their advertising works and which is a waste of money…And, shockingly, that doesn’t seem to bother them; they’re quite content to throw away half of the money they spend on advertising.
If they took the time to find out which half of their advertising works and which doesn’t, they could either eliminate the nonproductive half and save half of the ad budgets…Or they could get rid of the half that doesn’t work and replace it with something that does…and double their advertising’s impact.
If you run a radio station that has a client like that local bank that sends you a check each month for unfocused, unproductive “image” advertising, a client that is happy to throw the company’s money away, it’s okay to take it. But most businesses cannot afford to throw away their money. But most businesses want their advertising to be an investment, not a cost. Most businesses need their advertising to attract more revenue than the advertising costs.
Leave a Reply