Phone Numbers in TV Commercials

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

May I add, without having a clue about phone numbers, that some years back one of my broadcast masters for an unnamed very big client got stuck on the count-down clock on air – that sparked a phone call from Spain to London about budget for doing a golf commercial…

Nothing wrong with phone numbers or business details or website – it shows that the business exist – my 5p 🙂

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk

[Mark Suszko]

Mads, the info people put on the countdown/ leader is another separate subject entirely. Back in the 80’s and 90’s there was an artistic arms race going on, as every production company tried to make their slate/leader/countdowns more and more fabulous and cool. Even then it was kind of a joke because usually only tape operators and engineers would ever see it. But as you said, that slate was also a kind of calling card, advertising the hipness and advanced capabilities of the post house that did the work, which went past the usual gate keepers, attached to the client’s reel like remora hitching on a shark. But you’d never know if and when a potential client might see it.

[Simon Roughan]

Exactly, Mr Suszko.
You will never be able to track SALES from a spot, because a spot cannot sell. You could track contacts perhaps.
The very best you can hope for with a TV commercial, is exactly what Mark describes. Perhaps sometime in the future, when someone needs the product or service in the ad, your ad was good enough to stick in the mind so they will then be motivated to contact the firm. I never promise anything else to a client.
Selling is done properly only by real people. Leave the phone number out, include a relevant and easy-to-remember web address.
My 2 cents, as a commercial producer with a few years behind me, although not as much as Todd…

mfg
Simon

[Mark Suszko]

Danke, Simon.

I would however attach one proviso: IF you use a number specifically created just for the campaign, or a web site address specifically created for the campaign, THEN, you CAN get a metric on the number of calls/ web hits before and after the spot, to judge relative effectiveness. You would have to generate additional, unique phone and URL for a second, different spot, running in the same places and times, to “know” which ad is “better”. This is a truer version of the so-called “A/B Testing” that another poster referred to earlier. But the quality of the comparison suffers, if you don’t present simultaneously to identical audiences.

There’s a number of articles on using A/B testing in development in many different industries and applications, might be worth a Google to look them up.

[Nick Griffin]

[Bob Cole] “You might produce two versions of the spot, one with the phone number, one without. Run the two spots on alternating weeks; track the sales.”

I seldom disagree with Bob, but have to point out a flaw in this idea. Spots don’t exist individually in a vacuum. In fact one of the most basic premises of media planning is calculating ‘frequency” — the number of times the theoretically average viewer sees the spot. (I’m a couple of decades removed from buying TV time, but the theory used to be that you needed a frequency of at least 6 or 7 to break through and get noticed — at all.)

Therefore if the spot runs with a phone number the first week and not the second, comparing week to week sales would not take into account the fact that in week 2 the viewer might be seeing the spot for the nth time and subsequent weeks would just add to the frequency with which the spot had been seen. A valid test would be if you could advertise versions with and without the phone number in different, yet statistically similar markets. That might have some validity as a test.

Clients, especially locally advertising clients almost always want to cram as much contact info into a spot as possible. Like the earlier post about someone wanting their zip code as well as their address, this is ridiculous and makes for bad, ineffective advertising.

But the exception, and what hasn’t been mentioned oddly enough is “Direct Response” advertising. In the world of Direct the spot IS the salesman in addition to the promotional vehicle. The phone number and/or website is the call to action because there is no other way to obtain what is being advertised. Hence memorable phone numbers repeated ad nauseum and web addresses being displayed throughout the entire spot. And as always the kicker, “But wait! If you act now, we’ll DOUBLE the offer.” (Just pay double the already inflated shipping and handling, which probably costs more than the item being sold.)

For regular, non-direct response local retail advertising. Location names and or maps can be an effective way of providing a response mechanism that actually works, again IMHO.

[Todd Terry]

[Mark Suszko] “…the info people put on the countdown/ leader is another separate subject entirely.”

And in this day and age of electronic delivery, largely a moot point.

I’m trying to think on an exception, but I believe every single one of the broadcast/cable outlets that we regularly deliver to now completely forbid countdowns or slates of any kind… a delivered file of a 30-second spot has to be exactly :30… 900 frames, no more, no less. Even 901 frames gets it kicked back and slates/leaders/countdowns are verboten.

We haven’t put a countdown or slate on a commercial spot in a couple of years or more now.
Which I kinda miss… I liked our funky retro countdown.

Way off track of this thread… but maybe worth mentioning.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Richard Herd]

Regarding slates:

LOS ANGELES NEWS SERVICE; ROBERT TUR, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CBS BROADCASTING, INC.; COURTROOM TELEVISION NETWORK, Defendants-Appellees

OVERVIEW: The copyright holder owned copyrights to videotape footage of the beating of a truck driver during the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Plaintiffs claimed that a video news service owned by the broadcasting company’s predecessor had distributed the copyrighted works to recipients including the network. The network used a few seconds of the footage to promote news coverage and as part of the introduction to one of its programs. Plaintiffs had agreed to a stipulated dismissal of their initial suit against defendants, but refiled their complaint after the parties failed to reach a settlement. The appellate court found, inter alia, that the district court erroneously excluded certain evidence on the basis of the stipulation agreement. As a videotape of allegedly infringing footage and its identifying slate were not hearsay and were sufficiently authenticated, there was enough admissible evidence to preclude summary judgment as to whether the broadcasting company was liable for infringement. However, the network’s use of the footage was protected as fair use given some transformative use, the factual nature of the work, the small portion of footage used, and market considerations.

[Bob Cole]

[Nick Griffin] “Spots don’t exist individually in a vacuum. “

What, Nick? Just because I don’t know what I’m talking about, you’re going to disagree with me?

Of course you’re right; testing is much more complicated than I was suggesting. But in some form, testing is the only way to resolve this question – and there are probably scads of studies on the topic.

[Mads Nybo jørgensen]

Hey Mark,

With all due respect; I do think that the point is as much as we video professionals can find new and engaging CTA’s, the old fashioned telephone number is for many people still a viable way to communicate. Whether the number features on an advert, direct TV commercial, in programme or indeed on a count-down clock, do not underestimate the power of the telephone and that personal touch that helps the customer decide that your firm is a nice one.

One important point though: it was not the invention of the first telephone that made the difference, it was only when the second one came into existence (+ the cable connecting them), that it really took off 😀 And so it is that the telephone will only work on commercials if there are someone around to answer the call.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
https://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk