One of the reasons we are still able to hum the ditties from the commercials we saw before the 90s is because we came across them many times. Its elements thus remained solidly etched in our memory, because they were repeated so many times that forgetting them seemed impossible. It is, for example, what happens if someone is asked about the experience of going to the movies. They may end up humming the Movie Record ditty simply because they have been exposed to it on a recurring basis on visits to a movie theater.Repetition and putting the message on a recurring basis in front of consumers have served as positioning elements for a long time. The big question is whether it would continue to work now or if it would actually only create a negative atmosphere for the brand.After all, replay was effective before the 1990s because it didn’t saturate consumers any more than they already were. That is, the environment in which consumers moved was full of ads, true, but those ads were much more limited than the ones they receive now.
The number of displays and exposures to the brand’s messages was much lower. Now the number of Turkey Phone Number List screens has multiplied, as well as the amount of information that consumers must manage every day. Not only is it harder to get noticed amid all that noise, but consumers also have a much lower threshold when it comes to accepting extra noise touches. What a few years ago was tolerated as a necessary or forgivable evil can now become a drag on the perception of the brand.And, therefore, serving the same ad over and over again and having it chase you through the different content channels rather than making it stay fixed in your memory can make you end up hating it.The consumer giants are beginning to have it more or less clear.
They have begun to assume that effectiveness in advertising is no longer achieved by chasing the consumer, but by thinking very well what to do and how the strategy is managed.Procter & Gamble has already seen it That is what Procter & Gamble is doing, which is already very clear that insisting and insisting with the same ad only annoys the consumer. “We want to ensure that we have relevant messages that have the appropriate level of frequency versus too , ” says Monica Turner, maximum sales manager for North America, as collected AdWeek .Instead of boredom launching their ads, they are trying to select the most appropriate time to launch them, and to do so (as you might almost say was to be expected) they are using analytics technology.
The reasons why they are making this change are clear. Another of its directors, the chief digital officer, Benjamin Spiegel, explained to the US media that for consumers there is no benefit in seeing the same ad over and over again.An excess of frequencies for an advertisement would therefore be a kind of waste in the media. What matters is not spending a lot of money and putting the ad even in the soup, but that the movements that are made are effective and that the impact is valuable. The key is in the data and in what it says about consumers, which crossing it with the use of other tools allows to go for the right opportunity.