Why do Marketers go for Celebrity endorsements? The reasons could be many; the highest recall among consumers, immediate positive impact on sales, new brand launches and re-introductions etc.
As a few experts put it, the reason could also be one of pure pressure from the top management to deliver on the brand and see immediate results. The pressure is definitely not unreasonable, as in today’s competitive scenario, the number of touch points that a consumer is exposed to, is showing a manifold increase. Hence, after years of meticulous R&D on a particular product, there is a rush on the Marketing side of the new brand.
The valid question that needs to be raised is the rationale or science behind each celebrity endorsement, from the marketer’s angle. From the celebrity’s angle, the rationale is purely one of personal choice or value of contract.
Breaking the clutter within multiple touch points, warrants the Marketer to come up with innovative attributes that will latch onto the consumer’s mind. Unfortunately, this is definitely not possible each and every time, with multiple people handling multiple brands in an organization. FMCG biggies in India have all implemented excellent clutter-breaking media from time to time. But everyone’s had their share of naïve moments.
The prospect of bringing some sense of sanity and consistency into marketing leads to celebrity endorsements. Statistics on the latest survey show that only around 30% of the consumers would consider the purchase of a brand based on a popular face. A higher percentage would associate themselves to a brand, if the celebrity is actually linked to the brand message in some way or the other.
Many pundits are now arguing about the ‘Tiger Woods’ phenomenon, ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’. Whether the associated brands have been affected or not, is debatable. Only Gatorade, would have suffered an immediate impact, due the withdrawal of an entire range of ‘Tiger’ branded drinks.
In India too, many brands solely run on the back of successful celebrities, the flip side would be a ‘Tiger’, but the positives weigh much more than the intangible probability of the brand getting hammered. Especially in light of Brand Managers changing almost every 2 years.
The only simple mantra, can be to stick to one’s ‘Brand message’ atleast for established brands, irrespective of the celebrity or non-celebrity route, Airtel is a good case in point. For new brands like Max, Karbon & MicroMax (IPL), ‘celebrity’ power could be the only way forward in a highly competitive category like Mobiles.
This post is a consequence of the Brand Equity article on Celebrity endorsements.
GRP (short for Gross Rating Point) is the sum of ratings achieved by a specific media vehicle or schedule. It represents the percentage of the target audience reached by an advertisement. If the advertisement appears more than once, the GRP figure represents the sum of each individual GRP. In the case of a TV advertisement that is aired 5 times reaching 50% of the target audience, it would have 250 GRP = 5 x 50% -- ie, GRPs = frequency x % reach.
A Target Rating Point (TRP) is a measure of the purchased target rating points representing an estimate of the component of the target audience within the gross audience. Similar to GRP (short for Gross Rating Point) it is measured as the sum of ratings achieved by a specific media vehicle of the target audience reached by an advertisement. For example, if an advertisement appears more than once, reaching the entire gross audience, the TRP figure represents the sum of each individual GRP multiplied by the estimated target audience in the gross audience.
In the case of a TV advertisement that is aired 5 times reaching 50% of the gross audience with only 60% in the target audience, it would have 250 GRPs (= 5 x 50%) -- ie, GRPs = reach x frequency and 150 TRPs (=250 x 60%).
Both of these metrics are critical components to determine the marketing effectiveness of a particular advertisement.