 has been the gold standard for TV ratings for decades, guiding media buyers and advertisers in tracking audience performance. However, 

 Global’s recent decision to move away from Nielsen in favor of VideoAmp signals a significant shift in TV ad measurement—and it could reshape the industry.

While TV networks have explored alternative measurement providers like iSpot, Comscore, and VideoAmp, these tools have mostly been used alongside Nielsen. Paramount’s decision, however, represents one of the first instances where a major network has chosen to operate without Nielsen—at least for now fully. This could set the stage for alternative measurement tools to compete more directly with Nielsen, offering networks and advertisers more flexibility in how they track and value audience engagement.

Paramount’s decision came after contract negotiations with Nielsen broke down over pricing issues. John Halley, Paramount’s Chief Advertising Officer, explained that Nielsen’s costs had "quintupled over significant parts of [their] business," making the current pricing model unsustainable. This echoes a broader sentiment across the industry: many networks have grown frustrated with the rising costs and perceived limitations of Nielsen’s services.

While Paramount has expressed a willingness to resolve the dispute and potentially return to Nielsen, their immediate focus is on VideoAmp for viewership data. This move highlights the industry's growing appetite for more cost-effective, flexible measurement solutions.

The broader implications for TV measurement

Paramount’s decision underscores two key trends shaping the future of TV measurement:

A new competitive landscape for measurement currencies:

This shift doesn’t suggest that Nielsen will cease to be a major currency, but it does lay the groundwork for alternative measurements to be considered true competitors. If Paramount successfully conducts business without Nielsen, it could inspire other networks to follow suit, accelerating the adoption of alternative currencies like VideoAmp. As these tools become more prominent, they could offer more tailored insights, giving advertisers a clearer picture of audience engagement and ad performance.

Pressure for cost-effective solutions and innovation:

Paramount’s frustration with Nielsen isn’t unique. Other networks may face similar pressures to seek alternative tools that provide more granular insights at a lower cost. As the industry evolves, networks and advertisers may gravitate toward measurement solutions that offer more flexibility and the ability to fine-tune campaigns in real-time.

For media buyers, Paramount’s break from Nielsen is an important reminder that the measurement landscape is evolving. While Nielsen remains the dominant player, alternative currencies are gaining traction, and buyers will likely encounter a mix of measurement tools in the near future.

Staying informed about these shifts will be crucial, as buyers may need to adjust their strategies to account for multiple measurement standards. Tools like VideoAmp offer the potential for more detailed, flexible insights, helping media buyers optimize ad spend and better understand viewer behavior across platforms.

Paramount’s move away from Nielsen doesn’t necessarily mark the end of Nielsen’s reign, but it does highlight the growing momentum behind alternative currencies. As more networks explore these options, the industry could see a more competitive, diverse measurement landscape where Nielsen is no longer the default choice.

This shift is an opportunity for media buyers. As alternative measurement tools continue to develop and compete with Nielsen, they could offer new ways to track and optimize campaigns, leading to better outcomes and a more nuanced understanding of audience engagement.

Ultimately, while Nielsen’s influence will likely continue, Paramount’s decision signals that the future of TV measurement may be more dynamic than ever before. Adapting to these changes and staying open to alternative tools will be key to delivering data-driven results in this new era of TV advertising.

Paramount's break from Nielsen highlights rising costs and growing demand for more flexible, cost-effective TV measurement tools

A Rise of Alternative Currencies Era: Paramount's Break with Nielsen and What It Means for the Industry

2024 Holiday Season Forecast: Cutting-Edge TV Ad Strategies, AI Power, and Pro Tips

Back to basics. Let's kick off our guide with a quick refresher on what CPM is.

Cost per thousand, or Cost per Mille (CPM), denotes the price of 1,000 advertisement impressions. In TV advertising, one impression refers to one individual exposure to an advertisement. The formula for calculating CPM is:

CPM is calculated using the formula: (Advertising cost / Impressions generated) * 1000.

Why do we care about CPM? It is used to assess the ad cost across various television networks and programs. Typically, expressed in dollars, CPM represents the cost of running an ad on a specific program or network for a given period. For a comprehensive understanding of CPM in advertising, you can refer to our 

TV CPMs: Understanding the Cost of Television Advertising

Here, we'll dive deeper into the factors that influence this metric and how to navigate these elements to maximize the efficiency of your TV ad campaigns. CPMs are highly dynamic, affected by variables such as the advertiser base, seasonality, and whether the buy is upfront or scatter.

In a perfect world, we could set the perfect TV ad campaign once and maintain the lowest CPM indefinitely. However, reality dictates otherwise. CPMs fluctuate constantly due to factors like advertiser demand, seasonal trends, market dynamics, etc. Our primary goal is to help you steer through this ever-changing landscape effectively.

Audience size and demographics affect CPM in TV advertising

Larger audiences and targeted demographics lead to higher CPMs due to demand, scarcity, and advertising reach effectiveness. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for advertisers to optimize their campaigns and budget allocations. Competition for smaller audiences is higher, making them more expensive to reach, while larger audiences are cheaper. Consequently, CPM for smaller audiences is higher, and for larger audiences, it is lower.

If your brand’s potential customers are baby boomers, the CPM for your campaign would be lower than if you were trying to reach the 18-25 group on traditional TV.

Here are some examples of CPM for different audiences - 8-25 and 55+, over a period from March 2024 to May 2024. As you can see, linear TV CPMs for 55+ are significantly lower and more stable than 18-25 because they are still relatively plentiful in traditional TV.

The next chart shows us the average CPM for the 18-25 and 55+ age groups across four different genres: Drama, News, Reality, and Sports. The CPM for the 18-25 group is significantly higher in all genres, especially in News, where it reaches close to $800. The CPM for the 55+ group is minimal across all genres.

Programs with the largest audiences typically command the highest CPMs. Prime-time shows, for instance, often boast the highest CPMs due to their broad reach. These shows, airing during the coveted evening hours when most people are tuned in, attract a vast and diverse audience.

The scarcity of ad slots during these highly-rated programs further intensifies competition among advertisers, driving up CPMs even more, especially in the scatter market. Here, last-minute ad buys become a frenzy of competition, with brands vying for those few remaining spots. This dynamic creates a premium environment where only the highest bidders secure their place in front of millions of viewers.

So be ready that during the season premiere of a highly-anticipated show, the season finale of a extremely popular series, Presidential debates, or especially the Super Bowl, CPM will be sky-high.

Here is an example of how the CPM changed due to the May 2024 Presidential Debate.

On this chart, we indexed the previous CPMs to the CPMs of the Presidential Debate and contrasted the previous two months’ CPM relative to it. As you can see from the chart below, CPMs prior to the debate were significantly lower – coming in at x% one month below, and y% two months below. Tentpole events like the Presidential Debate give networks (like CNN) the opportunity to charge significantly higher CPMs for an event that would attract a larger audience versus the status quo.

During festive seasons, such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, CPMs typically rise due to increased consumer spending and heightened competition for ad placements. Especially high CPM would be driven by high advertising demand from such categories as retail, fashion, electronics, travel, and, counter-intuitively, financial services - people might open new accounts or take out loans during this time. Even car purchases see a boost.

Traditionally, ad position within a program or break does not significantly impact the CPM. The position of an ad, whether at the beginning, middle, or end of a break, typically does not alter the cost per thousand impressions. However, potential influences can arise with sponsorships or special placements. For example, if an ad is part of a sponsorship package or strategically placed during a high-visibility moment, it might affect the CPM. Even then, the impact on CPM is not always guaranteed, as it depends on the specific terms of the sponsorship and the perceived value of the placement.

Common challenges in managing CPM for TV campaigns

 CPM is typically negotiated based on a network's sales estimates, which are often inflated.

Networks might need to use Audience Deficiency Units (ADUs) to meet guaranteed CPMs. ADUs are free advertising slots given to advertisers to compensate for viewership shortfalls during the contract period.

Popular shows and peak viewing times have limited ad inventory.

This scarcity drives up CPMs, making it tough to secure placements at reasonable rates.

Advertisers compete fiercely for slots during high-profile events like the Super Bowl.

This competition can significantly raise CPMs, straining the budgets of smaller advertisers.

Traditional linear TV relies on metrics like Nielsen ratings, which may not accurately reflect real-time audience reach beyond basic demographics (age and gender). That is why specific tool, like Simulmedia’s TV+ platform, which helps advertisers work with audiences, is needed

This inconsistency can complicate the assessment of CPM effectiveness.

Broader economic factors can influence advertising budgets and spending behavior.

Economic downturns may lead to reduced ad spending, affecting CPM rates and availability.

While not directly a part of CPM, ad quality and relevance significantly impact its effectiveness.

High-quality, relevant ads are more effective in driving engagement and achieving lower CPMs. Advertisers should continuously produce content that resonates with audiences.

Using data analytics to improve CPM Rates

Utilizing data analytics effectively can significantly enhance CPM rates by focusing on two key strategies:

Through data analysis, advertisers can pinpoint underutilized segments of inventory, such as specific networks or dayparts, where there is low demand but a high concentration of the target audience. These segments often present more cost-effective opportunities for ad placement, as they tend to have lower CPMs compared to highly sought-after slots. By strategically placing ads in these underutilized areas, advertisers can reduce their overall CPM and maximize the value of their media spend.

Targeting high-concentration audience segments

Data analytics also helps in identifying audience segments that are densely populated within certain inventory buckets. Targeting these high-concentration segments ensures that ads reach a large portion of the desired demographic without the premium costs associated with more competitive slots. This targeted approach not only improves ad efficiency but also enhances the effectiveness of the campaign by aligning ad placements with audience behavior and preferences.

Generally, a higher number of impressions should lead to a better ROI, provided that you are effectively targeting the right audience.

Higher CPMs can potentially yield better ROI when the ads effectively engage and resonate with the target demographic. Advertisers must ensure that the CPM costs align with the expected increase in sales or brand awareness. For instance, a strategically placed ad during a high-demand program can significantly boost returns, justifying the higher CPM.

However, measuring ROI from TV campaigns presents unique challenges. Unlike digital advertising, where clicks and conversions are directly trackable, TV advertising requires alternative methods for attribution. To address this, advertisers can use statistics provided by TV networks or leverage platforms like Simulmedia TV+, which aggregates data from various providers. This approach helps in assessing the impact of TV ads more accurately and linking them to sales increases or improved brand metrics.

In this guide, we’ve explored the complexities of CPM (Cost Per Thousand Impressions) in TV advertising, shedding light on its role and implications for effective campaign management. Here are the key points discussed:

 Smaller audeinces and more targeting generally lead to higher CPMs due to limited viewership (makes them harder to find), increased demand, and competition. Broader audiences, while less expensive to reach, often come with a higher CPM.

 The distinction between upfront and scatter markets affects CPM rates. Upfront buys typically have lower CPMs compared to scatter buys, which are more expensive due to limited inventory. However, scatter works better for your timing and provides marketers with a greater degree of control to manage their spend

 High-demand programs and peak viewing seasons drive up CPM rates, making it essential for advertisers to plan strategically to balance costs and visibility.

 Traditionally, the position of an ad within a program does not significantly impact CPM, except in cases of sponsorships or special placements, which might offer some influence on costs.

 Advertisers face various challenges, including inflated CPM estimates, competition for limited ad slots, inconsistent measurement metrics, and broader economic factors that affect budget and CPM rates.

 Data-driven strategies, such as identifying underutilized inventory and targeting high-concentration audience segments, can improve CPM rates and enhance campaign efficiency.

The industry's fixation on CPM vs. cost-per-reach

The advertising industry often fixates on CPM as a primary metric, but this approach may not always align with the broader goal of maximizing reach and engagement. CPM focuses on the cost of impressions, but a more comprehensive perspective would be to emphasize cost-per-reach. Cost-per-reach evaluates the cost of reaching a unique individual, providing a clearer picture of ad effectiveness in connecting with the target audience.

Argument for a greater emphasis on cost-per-reach

Shifting focus to cost-per-reach can offer a more nuanced understanding of ad performance. By evaluating how efficiently an ad reaches unique viewers, advertisers can better assess the true impact of their campaigns and optimize their budgets accordingly. After all, the life in likelihood of a consumer to take action is greatest when moving them from 0 exposures to 1 exposure – you can expect far greater exposure there than moving them from 6 exposures to 7. This reach-first approach ensures that advertising dollars are spent effectively, reaching as many potential customers as possible while avoiding unnecessary overspending on high CPM slots that do not significantly contribute to overall reach.

In summary, while CPM remains a crucial metric in TV advertising, integrating cost-per-reach into your evaluation strategy can provide a more holistic view of campaign effectiveness and enhance overall ROI.

Discover key factors influencing TV Advertising CPM and how to optimize your campaigns with data analytics, balancing cost-per-reach and CPM for better ROI.

Mastering CPM: How Audience Demographics and Ad Placement Influence TV Advertising Costs

has been prophesied since the internet came along. Yet, more than three decades into the WWW boom and at least half of that into the explosion of streaming, nothing’s as black and white as many would believe.

If you're here looking for a quick answer to the question of whether traditional TV advertising is still effective, it's "yes."

There is nuance, however, and it's important to be aware of it if you're looking to invest your money in TV ads. And that is precisely what we're going to explore in this article.

Yes, TV advertising is still effective from every perspective.

If you're specifically thinking of linear (traditional) advertising, then yes, it is still effective. If you're thinking of CTV (connected TV), then that's effective, too.

According to data collected at Simulmedia, 73% of all American households watch linear TV, 84% stream content on their TVs, and 57% do both. More relevant, American households watch an average of 4+ hours of 

 TV daily. That includes linear TV and connected TV (CTV), with 78% of all this time dedicated to linear TV (which is almost all ad-supported!).

It might seem everyone's on their phones, but data tells a different story: one where TV (be it linear or connected) is still a very relevant medium for brands that want to deliver a message. Of course, TV advertising has changed (if anything, even linear TV is now more data-driven than ever, and CTV ad availability is growing by the year.) But at the end of the day, TV ads will always be about trust and exposure. Done right, it will always be effective.

TV advertising vs social media advertising and banner ads

Research shows the average internet user spends around 

 daily on social media. That is, undoubtedly, a lot of time spent scrolling, so it's no wonder that 

Social media advertising comes with plenty of benefits, for sure:

It's easy to set up (no need for a big budget, either)

It's relatively easy to track results and optimize your campaigns.

Social ads are undoubtedly advantageous – but they 

 also getting increasingly more expensive. Meanwhile, TV ads are seen as untargetable and unattributable.

That is not the case, though. You can target modern TV ads through data-driven linear techniques so they’re shown to a good swath of the audience that’s likely to buy from you. And you can definitely measure the impact of your efforts, too (yes, even for those “awareness” campaigns.) TV ads can also trigger a halo effect on your social media ads – because once the show is over, and the remote control’s on the table, people will always turn to Facebook, Tiktok, and Instagram for one last scroll before they turn in, and they may prove more receptive to engaging with your ad after having recognized your brand from the big screen.

Your social efforts, banner ads, and your TV ads can and should work in tandem. They are not mutually exclusive, and neither of them is outdated. They are part of the funnel. Instead of looking at them as opposites or competitors, marketers should see them as complementary: where a TV ad delivers the main message (and builds trust, brand affinity, and so on), a banner ad can serve as a reminder, for example. Banner ads are easily ignored (

 of consumers experience banner blindness!) – but TV ads have the power to reach a broader audience and make a lasting impression.

Online video advertising (such as pre-roll ads on YouTube) has similarities with TV advertising in that it has a broad reach and visual impact. However, it also has a lower barrier to entry, which means the competition is fiercer.

The flip side to that? Most online video ads show in outstream units, on autoplay. Worse, some publishers misrepresent outstream units as “instream” units to inflate CPMs, and many of them, despite being “unskippable,” can easily be ignored simply by scrolling past them or clicking the X and shutting them down. While watching a couple of ads at halftime might be OK with most people and are more-or-less accepted by broad audiences already acclimated to pre-roll and mid-roll ads, it’s not as great when these outstream ads are intrusive and interrupting, sometimes covering up the content the consumer is trying to read. This kind of annoyance simply makes for a very low customer experience.

Moreover, online video ads usually live on small screens: smartphones, tablets, and so on. Even when they are in full-screen mode, they still don’t have the same effect as an ad that plays on a large TV screen (the largest screen in the house.)

Yes, online ads might have a lower barrier to entry. And yes, they might be effective in some cases, such as watching a pre-roll ad that comes on before a rerun of the show on your tablet. But at the end of the day, TV ads are just 

 for customer experience, reach, building trust, and memorability.

Let's say you are already on the fence about whether you should start advertising on TV. Here are some of the top advantages to consider:

TV ads have the potential to reach a massive audience, including diverse age ranges and demographics. Yes, the number of linear TV households is declining every year, but the number of linear TV households is still a very large number – about 90mm households as of 2024 (see for yourself by accessing 

). Right now, between CTV and linear TV, more than 110 million households in the US own and watch at least one form of television. That's a lot of potential reach, which makes TV an effective medium for scaled brand awareness and exposure, especially when you adopt a holistic cross-channel approach that spans linear and connected TV. Plus, unlike social media or online ads, where people can scroll by or click away, TV ads have the benefit of capturing a more captive audience.

TV is still perceived as a reputable and trustworthy source of information compared to online ads, which can be seen as intrusive and untrustworthy. By appearing on TV, your brand can benefit from this perception of trust and credibility, making it easier for potential customers to trust and buy from you.

 shows that 20% of people trust offline sources (like TV, radio, and newspapers) more, and only 11% say the same about online sources (such as YouTube ads, Google Ads, social ads, and so on). This is 

 to say online ads aren’t effective or useful – a well-timed and strategized combination of online and offline advertising can be a complete game changer for virtually any business.

TV ads are visually compelling. They use music, motion graphics, storytelling techniques, and more to create an emotional connection with the audience. This visual impact can have a more significant effect on the viewer than text-based or static online ads, which do not have the same ability to evoke emotions.

TV ads are more effective at creating brand affinity and awareness than online ads. With TV, you can tell a story or showcase your product or service in a way that resonates with the audience on an emotional level. Additionally, by being in front of viewers more frequently (through multiple ad spots), you can increase brand recall and recognition.

TV ads are still seen as “too exclusive,” given the high production costs and airtime rates – the truth is a lot more nuanced, though. Ads don’t have to cost millions to produce and run on national TV – however, 

 most likely assign your brand with the idea of “worth” associated with airing adjacent to professionally-produced, premium content.

TV advertising is not perfect (nor is online advertising, for that matter.)

The main drawbacks of TV advertising include:

Producing a high-quality TV ad can be costly, especially if you want to compete with other established brands. From scriptwriting, hiring actors and crew, location fees, and post-production editing, the expenses add up quickly. For smaller businesses or startups, this can be a significant barrier to entry for TV advertising.

However, direct-to-consumer ads and user-generated content, and soon AI-based video ads, will become more popular in recent years, making TV advertising more accessible and affordable to businesses of all sizes. Contrary to popular belief, you don't 

TV ads can reach a broad audience, but most marketers believe they lack the granular targeting options that online advertising offers. Traditionally, TV doesn't allow you to be very specific with your audience's demographics or interests, for example -- but mostly relies on age and gender as the basic targeting units. Interest, affinity, behaviors, habits – they all slip through the cracks in traditional TV advertising.

Modern data-driven linear TV advertising, however, has long bypassed this problem. Platforms like Simulmedia, for example, work with a selective set of high-quality data providers to create niche audiences you can use to build the perfect media plan to efficiently reach as much of your niche/strategic audience as efficiently as possible. Buying ads on traditional TV may still not be as granular nitty-gritty as some digital advertising, but it does one thing better than social, search, and online banner ads: it gets to people who are not as likely to scroll, skip, or click “X” on your message.

Difficulty in measuring outcome effectiveness

Generally, TV ads are considered less measurable than their online counterparts. In part, that is true -- online ads are traceable because when your goal is an action (i.e., a conversion, a download, a purchase, etc.), you can track it directly, from impression to click and then to purchase. Still, it’s worth noting that this level of detailed measurement is slowly going away (with third-party cookies being phased out on Google – and other platforms in the future).

The reality is, however, that one person could see your ad, social posts, and organic content multiple times before they buy. Marketing, after all, is a team sport. So while attribution in online advertising 

 more transparent, it isn't necessarily more accurate (it’s just as accurate as your attribution model – and likely to circle back to basics once third-party cookies are phased out.)

That being said, modern TV advertising has also made strides in measuring effectiveness by incorporating data and analytics to track audience engagement and conversions from the TV to other home devices, such as laptops, tablets, or phones. Measurement devices like incremental lift measurement and spike-level attribution help you determine the effectiveness of your ad probabilistically. For instance, if your ad ran at 9:04 PM and by 9:14 PM your website received a spike in traffic, it is probably your ad at work.

In most contexts, the fact that TV is a broadcasting medium is useful and 

. After all, you want your ad to be shown to as many people as possible, right?

Yet, unlike online ads, TV is not a one-to-one dynamic channel. Modern technology will provide you with info on a significant chunk of your unreached target audience and what shows, networks, or dayparts they’re likely to watch. Still, when you buy that spot, you will show your ad to both people within your target audience and other people who just “happen” to be there.

The audience's mindset when exposed to a TV ad often differs from their mindset when coming across a digital ad. Online ads, be they social, search, banner, or outstream video, need to stop people from scrolling and make them pay attention and not skip the ad. TV ads, however, have a slightly more nuanced approach to capturing attention: they take viewers from a state of passivity (watching their shows) to a state of engagement.

So, what are the rules for creating effective TV ads? Here are some ground rules:

Before you begin creating your ad, it's important to define your objectives. What do you want to achieve with your campaign? Are you looking to increase brand awareness, drive sales, or promote a specific product or service? Having a clear understanding of your objectives will help you create an ad that is tailored to your needs and is more likely to achieve your desired results.

Once you've defined your objectives, you'll need to identify your target audience. Who are you trying to reach with your ad? What are their interests and habits? Understanding your target audience will help you create an ad that resonates with them and is more likely to be successful.

The key to a successful TV ad is creating a compelling message that resonates with your target audience. This means creating an ad that is visually striking, emotionally compelling, and easy to understand. By utilizing the power of sight, sound, and motion, you can create ads that are more likely to make an impact on viewers and achieve your desired results.

Before you launch your ad, it's important to test it with a small group of people. This will help you identify any issues or areas for improvement before you launch your ad to a wider audience.

Once your ad is live, it's important to measure your results. This will help you understand how your ad is performing and identify areas for improvement. By regularly monitoring your results, you can make adjustments to your ad and your campaign to improve its performance and achieve better results.

Yes. Advertising on TV can be a powerful tool for businesses of all sizes. With the ability to reach millions of viewers and target specific demographics, you can use TV to drive your business objectives and promote your brand. Brands can create a successful TV advertising campaign that delivers real results by creating a compelling ad, testing it, and measuring its results.

Additionally, it's important to remember that TV advertising is not a one-time investment. To make the most of your campaign and achieve the best results, it's important to evaluate and refine your ad and your approach continuously. This may involve experimenting with different targeting methods, adjusting your ad's creative elements, or changing the timing of your campaign.

Another important aspect of advertising on TV is to consider the placement of your ad. A prime-time slot during a popular show can be expensive but will reach a large audience. However, you can also consider cable TV or local channels that can be more affordable but still reach your target audience since they may be more cost-efficient. And, of course, always take a cross-channel approach and reach younger folks who have moved exclusively to connected TV.

Finally, it's important to work with a reputable creative advertising agency that can help you create a compelling ad, and a TV ad-buying partner who can then place that great ad in the right spots and measure your results, whether that’s reach, website visits, or other business outcomes. These experts will have the knowledge and expertise to help you create an ad that makes the most of sight, sound, and motion to achieve your desired results.

 for TV and streaming advertising provides unified access to premium linear and CTV inventory across all networks and publishers. 

 or email us at advertise@simulmedia.com.

Exploring TV Advertising's Relevance in Today's Digital World

Why Advertise on TV? Beyond the Hype: TV Advertising's Enduring Effectiveness in a Digital World

 that covered the initial sessions of the ANA conference, we continue to delve into the profound discussions and insights shared by industry leaders. The day-long event at Simulmedia brought together experts who explored various facets of the evolving television landscape. In this post, we’ll pick up where we left off, beginning with the fourth session, "Making Programmatic Work for TV."

The session "Making Programmatic Work for TV" featured Dave Dworin, Chief Product Officer at Freewheel, who provided a comprehensive overview of the challenges and opportunities in integrating programmatic advertising with television.

Dworin kicked off with a striking statistic that underscored the rapid growth in programmatic: “Programmatic going to publishers has grown 6X and now generates a third of TV publishers' CTV revenue.” This set the stage for a detailed exploration of the unique dynamics of programmatic in the TV ecosystem.

A key highlight of the session was Dworin's vision for the future of the Upfronts. He posited that TV publishers need to offer a mix of buying models in their upfront commitments. This would include not just the standard non-biddable direct insertion orders and sponsorships, but also programmatic guaranteed and even biddable models from private marketplace deals. Advertisers favor biddable models as they allow more control over their buys. However, this complexity introduces a challenge for publishers who must now manage advertiser commitments across both non-biddable (which they control) and biddable models (which advertisers control).

Dworin explained that if advertisers set their bids too low, publishers might see these biddable commitments fall short and shift more money into non-biddable models, which could frustrate advertisers. Innovations from Freewheel address this by providing publishers with tools to signal advertisers: “Hey, you may want to increase your bids because your biddable buys are pacing below expectations.” This allows the buy-side to self-correct instead of having the publishers make the corrections.

One of the key points Dworin emphasized was the disparity in data ownership between web and CTV. “All of the data in the web lives in the buy-side, but all the data in the CTV side live in the sell-side,” he explained, highlighting a fundamental difference that shapes how programmatic advertising operates in these two environments. This difference necessitates a tailored approach to data utilization and ad targeting in CTV.

Dworin also discussed the complexities and risks associated with live events, which are a significant draw for advertisers. “The coolest events are happening in live, but there’s an added level of risk. High value, high risk,” he noted. He elaborated on the technical challenges, such as handling simultaneous ad requests during major live broadcasts, which can overwhelm systems not adequately prepared for such spikes in demand.

A major focus of the session was on the need for technological and strategic adaptations to make programmatic viable in the TV space. Dworin pointed out, “One of the big reasons you are in the Upfronts is you want to access the really big tentpole events — and a lot of those are live. But live is really hard.” He detailed the various technical hurdles, including pacing algorithms and fraud alerts, that need to be managed to ensure successful ad delivery in real-time environments.

Dworin's insights also touched on the ongoing industry challenge of transitioning from web-based programmatic to TV-based programmatic. He explained that traditional web programmatic relies heavily on 2D display ads, whereas TV programmatic is fundamentally different because it revolves around video content and timing. “Programmatic for video is based on time. That’s the first big change, and that changes the way a DSP paces,” he said, underlining the necessity for a paradigm shift in programmatic strategies to cater to the TV medium.

The session wrapped up with a discussion on the strategic trade-offs for brands considering programmatic TV. Dworin cautioned that while programmatic offers numerous benefits, it also comes with its own set of challenges, such as additional costs and limited access to certain types of premium inventory. However, with careful planning and the right technological infrastructure, these challenges can be mitigated to unlock the full potential of programmatic in television.

As the session concluded, it was evident that while making programmatic work for TV requires navigating complex terrain, the rewards of successful integration are substantial. The insights shared by Dworin provided a clear roadmap for leveraging programmatic to enhance the effectiveness and reach of TV advertising.

Reimagining the Client/Agency Partnership to Optimize Programmatic

The session "Reimagining the Client/Agency Partnership to Optimize Programmatic" featured insightful discussions led by Jo Zmood, Managing Director at OMD, and Katherine Freeley, Head of the Media Center of Excellence at Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals. They explored how client and agency relationships need to evolve to better leverage programmatic advertising, anchored around three key pillars: Governance, Collaboration, and Transparency.

Zmood began by emphasizing the importance of a co-created governance framework that ensures shared accountability for media’s impact on business outcomes. “Media is becoming more and more a topic of agenda in boardroom discussions because media is playing a bigger role today in driving business outcomes,” he said. This statement underscored the strategic value of media investments and the necessity for closer collaboration between clients and agencies.

The second pillar, Collaboration, was illustrated through the global transformation efforts delivered via the streamlined structure of OneBIH, a dedicated, bespoke partnership model. Freeley explained the unique challenges faced by pharma companies in navigating the media landscape. “CPG companies understand media and marketing really well. Pharma companies — they focus on research — and I don't think we want to change that. Our focus is on prolonging the life of future generations. For pharma companies, media is a bit of a conundrum — they don't often understand it,” she noted. This highlighted the need for agencies to educate and guide clients through the complexities of programmatic advertising.

Radical candor and transparency, the third pillar, are crucial in client/agency relationships. “We need to learn how to be radically honest about how we're transparent and how we are tackling issues. Because if we're not, then you hit the point where you cannot communicate effectively,” Freeley stressed. This honesty is crucial for building trust and ensuring that both parties are aligned in their objectives and strategies.

Zmood emphasized the importance of benchmarking and accountability within this transparent framework. “We've been a strong proponent on benchmarking with the ANA because more and more, we as agencies need something to be held accountable to in programmatic,” he stated. This accountability is essential for maintaining high standards and delivering measurable results in programmatic campaigns.

One of the most impactful points made by Freeley was the environmental impact of programmatic advertising. “Programmatic is one of the biggest carbon emitters, especially made for advertising sites that use a lot of server farms. They emit more carbon than the whole airline industry altogether. Our responsibility as advertisers is not only to focus on a clean programmatic supply, but also to minimize carbon emissions,” she said. This perspective added a new dimension to the discussion, highlighting the need for sustainable practices in digital advertising.

The session concluded with a focus on ROI and continuous education. “In a nutshell, when we invest in media, we do expect an ROI, and that manifests itself in terms of 'new to script' or 'script lift' in metrics,” Freeley noted. She also emphasized the ongoing need to educate marketers about changes in the media landscape and viewership behaviors. “There's a lot of data coming into the marketplace, and how we harness that and utilize it in new ways to find the audiences, that's the new frontier,” Zmood added.

Game On: Exploring the Future of Brands and Video Games

The final session of the ANA conference, "Game On: Exploring the Future of Brands and Video Games," was a riveting exploration into the intersection of gaming and brand engagement. Joost van Dreunen, Professor at NYU Stern, and Adam Keaney, General Manager at 

, led the discussion, highlighting the immense potential of gaming as a cultural and commercial platform.

Joost van Dreunen kicked off the session by addressing the unique cultural space that gaming occupies. “Gaming affords a cultural space that no other form of media does,” he remarked, underscoring the deep and personal connections players have with their games. This connection presents a unique opportunity for brands to engage with audiences in meaningful ways.

Van Dreunen also discussed the shift from service models to games as platforms, a transition accelerated by the pandemic. “What excites me now post-pandemic — we've transitioned away from the service model towards games as a platform,” he explained. This shift allows for continuous engagement and interaction, providing brands with ongoing opportunities to connect with gamers.

Adam Keaney added to this by sharing insights on how major IP adaptations can drive engagement. “Fallout, newly out on Amazon, inspired a huge spike in downloads of the game, which had already been out for years, attracting a brand new audience,” he noted. This example highlighted the powerful synergy between gaming content and other media forms, creating multiple touchpoints for brand interaction.

Keaney showcased compelling quotes on the monitors that emphasized the growing influence of gaming among younger generations. He cited Dennis Kooker, President of Global Digital Business at Sony Music, saying, “When we look at Gen Z and Gen Alpha, what we’re seeing is that gaming is the No. 1 entertainment choice over video.” This was further reinforced by Meredith Kopit Levien, CEO of The New York Times, who stated, “Wordle brought an unprecedented tens of millions of new users to The Times, many of whom stayed to play other games, which drove our best quarter ever for net subscriber additions to Games.”

Keaney also engaged the audience in a revealing exercise, getting them to acknowledge that even casual game players are gamers. He presented a statistic showing that people spend nearly 12 hours a week on video games and virtual worlds. This figure closely trails the time spent on "social media & video sharing platforms" (13.12 hours per week) and "broadcast TV & subscription services" (13.92 hours per week). This data underscored the significant role of gaming in the broader entertainment landscape.

The session concluded with a focus on the evolving perceptions of gamers and the integration of gaming into broader media strategies. “Gaming now is at this moment where we can share, have meaningful moments with others. The stereotypical model of the gamer as someone alone in his basement — we're well past that moment,” Van Dreunen concluded, emphasizing the mainstream acceptance and social aspects of gaming today.

The ANA conference at Simulmedia provided a wealth of insights into the evolving television and media landscape. From rethinking the upfronts and tackling programmatic transparency to exploring the vibrant future of gaming, each session was packed with actionable takeaways and thought-provoking ideas.

At Simulmedia, we pride ourselves on being a trusted partner dedicated to helping our clients achieve exceptional results in media and TV advertising. Our advanced TV and data-driven insights ensure that clients not only stay ahead of industry trends but also maximize the effectiveness of their campaigns. Working with Simulmedia means gaining access to cutting-edge solutions and expertise that consistently deliver outstanding outcomes. Our commitment to innovation and excellence means that clients always leave our collaborations smarter and better equipped to navigate the complexities of the media landscape.

Dive into the latest insights from the ANA conference at Simulmedia, covering the future of programmatic TV, client/agency partnerships, and the booming world of gaming. Discover how industry leaders are reshaping the media landscape!

The Next Big Thing in TV and Gaming: More Insights from the ANA Conference

Unlocking Opportunity in the Evolving Television Landscape

, hosted at the Simulmedia office, was nothing short of a revelation. As industry leaders gathered to discuss the rapidly evolving television landscape, the air was thick with anticipation and excitement. The conference was a melting pot of ideas, with each session shedding light on different facets of media, advertising, and programmatic TV strategies. Let's dive into the highlights from the first three sessions, starting with the thought-provoking "The Upfront is Dead, Long Live the Upfront."

The Upfront is Dead, Long Live the Upfront

The day kicked off with a bang as Jon Werther, CEO of Simulmedia, took the stage to moderate the opening session titled "The Upfront is Dead, Long Live the Upfront." Tamara Alesi, CEO of MediaPlus NAM, and Kevin Cahn, AVP & Head of Media COEs at Kepler Group, joined him. Together, they embarked on a thorough examination of the traditional concept of the upfront and its relevance in today's media environment.

Tamara Alesi’s opening remarks were nothing short of eye-opening: “60% of YouTube viewers are on the big screen these days,” she announced, highlighting a significant shift in viewer behavior. This statement set the tone for a session brimming with candid insights and bold predictions.

Alesi didn't hold back when addressing the current state of the upfront market. “Today, you have to also buy a lot of garbage when you buy in an upfront. You have to be okay with that,” she stated bluntly, pointing out the inefficiencies and compromises inherent in the traditional model. However, she quickly pivoted to underscore the importance of emerging platforms and flexibility in media planning.

The conversation then turned towards emerging players and trends. Alesi boldly predicted, “I think Amazon is going to be the network to watch in this Upfront.” This sentiment was echoed by many in the room as the tech giant continues to make significant inroads into the media space. She also highlighted the growing role of Connected TV (CTV), stating, “CTV will play a huge role in this year’s upfront.”

One of the most compelling parts of Alesi's presentation was her discussion on innovation and retail media. “The biggest innovation we'll see this month is commerce. Retail media takes 20% of the share right now; by next Christmas season, it will be 25-30%,” she predicted. This shift towards integrating commerce with media signals a new era of 'brandformance,' a term she elaborated on by saying, “We talk a lot in our agency today about brandformance. Everyone wants to know, 'What's your return?'”

Kevin Cahn complemented Alesi’s insights with his own perspective on the importance of testing and learning in media strategies. “Don’t be afraid to ask, and don’t be afraid to fail. There’s a lot of new stuff out there, and unless you’re testing, you’re not learning enough,” he advised. Cahn's emphasis on disciplined media practices resonated well with the audience. “All media drives outcomes if you can be disciplined in how you test, validate, and iterate,” he added, reinforcing the need for continuous improvement and adaptability.

Cahn also stressed the necessity of being agile in media planning. “Flexibility and the ability to bob and weave and change with your client is so important,” he emphasized, illustrating the need for agility in a fast-paced media landscape.

The session wrapped up with Alesi reiterating the importance of evaluating media investments through the lens of 'brandformance.' “You should look at how every single dollar you lay down is affecting brand and performance -- that’s why we call it brandformance,” she concluded, leaving the audience with a clear directive to balance brand building with performance metrics in their media strategies.

As attendees moved to the next session, the energy in the room was palpable. The discussions were not just about the death of the traditional upfront but also about the birth of new opportunities and the exciting future of media. This was just the beginning of a day filled with groundbreaking insights and thought-provoking conversations.

Programmatic Transparency Matters: Rebalancing Information Asymmetry

The second session of the day, titled "Programmatic Transparency Matters: Rebalancing Information Asymmetry," delved into the intricate world of programmatic advertising. As the speakers took their places, the audience braced themselves for a deep dive into one of the most pressing issues in digital advertising today.

Tom Triscari, CEO and Programmatic Economist at Lemonade Projects, moderated the session. He began with an overview of the ANA transparency paper, highlighting key findings and setting the stage for a robust discussion. He pointed out the significant shifts by major players like Google and Meta towards less transparency but with guaranteed outcomes, emphasizing the industry's evolving landscape.

Sabrina Traskos, VP of Commercial Procurement at Regeneron, opened with a provocative statement that immediately captured the room's attention: “As a procurement specialist, I will take guaranteed ROI any day over a transparent, non-guaranteed buy.” Her perspective highlighted a key tension in the industry: the balance between transparency and guaranteed outcomes. This sentiment was especially poignant given the recent moves by giants like Google and Meta towards less transparency in favor of assured results.

Traskos continued by shedding light on the inefficiencies she has observed in media buying. “For every hundred million dollars of creative and media we were buying, 40% was rework,” she explained. This reality of significant waste underscores the necessity for greater efficiency and accountability in the media buying process. She didn't shy away from illustrating the operational challenges procurement specialists face, adding, “We get more and more pressure to deliver shareholder value with less budget and fewer experienced marketers.”

A particularly memorable part of the session was Traskos's discussion on the concept of FOFO—fear of finding out. She explained that while brands often demand transparency, there is an underlying reluctance to fully embrace it. “When you ask regular consumers how many media companies they can recall reading, they may list about 6-8. So how do we justify the thousands of publishers in a typical media plan?” she asked. This fear of uncovering inefficiencies and waste is a significant barrier to true transparency.

Triscari added context to this discussion by questioning the growing reliance on proprietary trading. “How is it more and more money is going into proprietary trading when everyone is concerned about transparency?” he asked. Triscari's remarks pointed to the growing concern over the opaque nature of programmatic deals, where significant sums of money flow without clear visibility into where and how they are spent.

One of the session’s most intriguing moments came when Traskos recounted a conversation with a marketing colleague. Given the choice between a non-transparent buy with guaranteed ROI and a transparent buy without guaranteed ROI, her colleague preferred the latter. “I was shocked,” Traskos admitted. “But they wanted the data and insights from transparency because they questioned whether the reported ROI was real and believed the learnings would help them achieve more in the long run.” This tension between the immediate needs of procurement and the long-term goals of marketing highlighted a fundamental conflict within the industry.

Traskos vividly illustrated the practical challenges of programmatic advertising: “When we get into programmatic reporting, you get stuck in the weeds, lost in the mud, unable to see the stars.” This analogy perfectly encapsulates the frustrations many marketers feel when the minutiae of data bog them down without clear, actionable insights.

As the session drew to a close, Traskos and Triscari's dialogue underscored the urgent need for greater transparency and efficiency in programmatic advertising. They suggested that the path forward would require a concerted effort from all stakeholders to rebalance the information asymmetry that currently plagues the industry. The emphasis on transparency, efficiency, and accountability set the stage for the next discussions as attendees prepared to delve deeper into the digital transformation of television.

100% Digital TV Future is Here: Optimizing Experiences for Viewers (+ Brands)

The session titled "100% Digital TV Future is Here: Optimizing Experiences for Viewers (+ Brands)" was led by Dani Cushion, Chief Marketing Officer at Innovid. Cushion immediately set the stage by addressing the monumental shift from linear TV to a digital-first approach. “It’s a big ship to shift from the linear buying motion and the historic upfront to more of a first digital-first, dynamic motion. But this gap represents an enormous opportunity,” she remarked.

Cushion emphasized the evolution of Connected TV (CTV) and its unique challenges and opportunities. “We have imposed this heavy digital ecosystem on CTV, but it’s really an evolution of linear TV. When the dollars flow in, we can't be in a system where money is just going out the window, where advertisers don't know what they are spending their dollars on,” she stated, highlighting the need for efficiency and transparency.

A standout moment was her discussion on the year's buzzword: Shoppable Ads. “The buzzword of the year is Shoppable Ads — major auto drivers are using this to drive viewers to a dealership via QR code,” she noted, showcasing how this new ad format is transforming viewer engagement and driving tangible results.

Cushion also touched on the importance of real-time measurement in digital TV. “You don’t have to wait weeks to act. Real-time measurement makes it all actionable,” she explained, stressing the importance of immediacy in optimizing advertising strategies.

The session concluded with Cushion emphasizing the holistic approach needed for success in CTV. “It’s really important for us, when we all link arms and dollars start flowing into CTV, that the experience is good for brands, good for publishers, but most importantly, good for viewers,” she concluded, leaving attendees with a clear vision of a cohesive, efficient, and viewer-centric digital TV future.

The ANA conference at Simulmedia provided a wealth of insights into the evolving media landscape. From rethinking the upfronts and tackling programmatic transparency to embracing a digital-first TV future, the sessions were packed with actionable takeaways. Industry leaders shared predictions and practical advice, setting the stage for continued innovation in television advertising. Stay tuned for more highlights from the remaining sessions.

Explore key insights from the ANA conference at Simulmedia, covering the transformation of upfronts, the importance of programmatic transparency, and the future of digital TV. Discover actionable takeaways from industry leaders.

The Future of Media Unveiled: Highlights from the ANA Conference at Simulmedia

 as tech giants like Amazon and Netflix transformed the traditional linear Upfront Week. This year featured their first in-person upfronts—Netflix, having canceled their 2023 event in favor of a virtual format. Their bold participation sparked industry curiosity about what they were bringing to the market, challenging traditional players like NBC, Disney, and WBD, whose announcements were overshadowed. Paramount/CBS opted for more intimate in-person meetings over large-scale presentations. Amazon, Netflix, and Google/YouTube have now risen to prominence alongside established broadcast networks, becoming major forces in content, talent, and scale.

A shift in market dynamics and consumption patterns at the 2024 upfront

Discover how Upfronts 2024 are reshaping the media landscape. From tech giants entering the fray to evolving advertising strategies, our latest blog dives into the seismic shifts and bold changes that redefine how media is bought and sold. Read now to stay ahead in the dynamic world of media advertising! 🌟 #MediaTrends #Upfronts2024

Join the Waitlist for Skybeam: Be First to Access Our Self-Service CTV Tool!

It's Time to Change The Way TV Is Measured