April 2009 – Branding Partners

Understanding why a brand response advertising strategy combines image with the strengths of direct response advertising

By Peter B. Aronow

Well everything’s changed. Just a few months ago, advertising rates were steady or rising and inventory was down. That was leading many marketers to conclude that since there was very little cheap TV time left on which to air traditional DRTV ads and with little chance that high inventories and low prices would be coming back any time soon, if ever, they needed to make messages more effective and efficient. In that reality, some products never made it to TV, others failed and many veteran direct marketers’ long predicted end of DRTV seemed to be upon us.

However, now for many in the industry this duck-and-cover period is over. Yes, we all need to maximize marketing dollars, but demand has eased, realities about the Internet replacing traditional channels have been mitigated, media availabilities are up–even in primetime–and prices are down.

This is great for direct marketers and many general advertisers who have been adding DRTV to their mix are reaping the benefit. To these general advertisers, DR media rates were low and now are extraordinarily cheap and offer opportunities they could not have imagined. Using DR has positioned them well for the current market and will serve them well when things return to normal.

So now what? In this climate of low media rates and broad availability, should direct marketers pay attention to branding? And, how can general advertisers best use DRTV?

The answer is to embrace brand response advertising that highlights brand benefits more prominently in direct response advertisements. With brand response advertising, traditional direct marketers can expand their reach and profitability, and traditional advertisers can benefit from direct opportunities while supporting and building their brands.

WHAT IS IT?

Brand response advertising relies on the power of well-articulated brand benefits to drive consumer sales. Quite literally, brand response combines the benefits-driven strengths of brand advertising with the accountability of direct response. Brand response advertising builds sales, generates leads and increases traffic to a web or retail site. It also leverages the communications to build brands.

Brand response began appearing when general media rates were high and availability was low. General advertisers used it to take advantage of lower rates with creative only marginally nodding to DR.

But direct marketers were realizing that they could highlight brand benefits more prominently in traditional direct response advertisements, which helped them online and at retail. This helped improve margins and offset increased media spending.

In California, ARCO produced a series of TV advertisements for “SmogPros,” its emissions testing service. There was no price mentioned. No deadline. No special offer. The entire campaign was based on a believable brand benefit–call for an appointment, and we guarantee the check will be completed within 30 minutes. The campaign was a monster success and demonstrates the power of brand response.

Wait a minute. Direct response advertisements without classic come-ons like “but wait, there’s more,” “for a limited time only” or “never again at this great low price”? That’s correct. Any product with a believable, compelling brand benefit is a perfect candidate for a brand response-based campaign. So are traditional hard-sell direct response spots, where a little branding will help at retail and online.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

There are several important differences between traditional direct response, brand-building campaigns, and brand response advertising (see chart below). Brand response is “maxi-advertising”–advertising that accomplishes two goals simultaneously.

BRAND RESPONSE GUIDELINES: IS IT RIGHT FOR YOUR BRAND?

The dual emphasis of brand response means that brand response will not be the right choice for every client or product. To evaluate a product’s potential for brand response, use these guidelines:

• Your product’s benefit must be believable. Your brand benefits do not necessarily need to be unique to the product or category. For example, the car doesn’t have to be the fastest, shiniest or biggest. You don’t need to own the superlative to establish a brand benefit. But it needs to be believable!
• Benefits are paramount in a brand response advertisement. There still is room to use traditional DR techniques–”two free cases of bottled water” or “buy one, get one free”–in a brand response advertisement. The key is that these more traditional techniques remain secondary to the positioning of the brand benefits. For example, the brand benefit for Sparklett’s is great tasting water with dependable home delivery. That’s what people are buying, even though the campaign still invokes the industry-standard “two free bottles when you call” offer.
• The brand response sales environment generally will be a direct response environment. These usually aren’t products you’d expect to find at the grocery store or electronics superstore. AOL is a great example. You don’t even expect to see AOL at retail. You expect to get it through direct response. Dell and Gateway–in fact, the whole computer industry–are perfect candidates for brand response advertising. However, brand response need not exist exclusively in a DR sales environment. Sometimes, the retail sales are equally (or more!) important as driving DR sales. You need a very powerful branding message to accomplish this (take Proactiv Solution as an example). To be effective, you also need to coordinate different sales channels so that they work together.
• You are willing to spend at brand-building levels. A brand response campaign does cost more than a direct response campaign, which traditionally is done for the least amount of money possible. Brand response production costs can be comparable to those of a typical image campaign, while media rates are a mix.
• You believe in the power of branding on TV. You’ll need to use TV as the driving force of your campaign. That takes commitment and money. Print-oriented campaigns, as an example, rarely generate anything resembling the level of awareness you get from TV.
• It takes time. Because the benefit message is such a prominent component of brand response, it may take longer for a brand response campaign to work up a full head of steam, compared to a value-driven direct response campaign. Also, because this approach creates a more memorable impression on the consumer, brand response advertisements can be more complex to evaluate. Brand response can generate tremendous synergies between print, the web, radio, FSIs and direct mail. For example, if someone finds your Yellow Pages ad and calls, but they saw your brand response TV advertisement the night before…who gets the credit for the sale?

TIME WILL TELL

Brand response TV is clearly not for everybody, or every product. If you don’t have a viable product, or if the product doesn’t have a clear and compelling brand benefit–and let’s face it, there are many products that are useful, but not particularly compelling brand candidates–then brand response is not an approach you should embrace. Or, if you are selling a low-priced, single-shot product and just want sales, are not interested in building a brand or selling line extensions and only have the margins to make traditional DRTV work, then you know what to do. Will brand response TV become the de facto direct response standard? Things were certainly headed in that direction, but then the financial crisis hit and turned everything upside down. Now it appears it will have an ever-increasing role because marketers need to use all the tools available to maximize response and return.

Peter B. Aronow is with PBandJ Partners in East Hampton, N.Y. The company specializes in advertising, marketing and production. Aronow can be reached at (631) 329-9912, or via e-mail at peter@pbandjpartners.com.