st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
Asking people in London for their opinions this week Brand Republic found that Sky+ and other digital video recorders have changed their viewing habits with most people recording programmes in advance and then skipping through the ads.
However the majority would press play for a particularly entertaining, creative or highly publicised ad such as Honda's live parachute jump.
Ad agencies will swim harder against the PVR current, with Freeview recorders gaining in popularity and news this week that the first unit suitable for use with Freesat is launching in November.
The Humax model boasts a 320GB hard drive capable of storing up to 80 hours of HD programming or 200 hours of standard definition material.
Earlier this month it was revealed ITV was trialling new overlay ad technology, which will allow ads to be embedded into blank space during TV programmes, to overcome the problem of viewers skipping ads.
The technology, developed by Californian start-up Keystream, uses complex computer algorithms to find clear space such as sky or blank walls to display company logos or messages.
It is currently being tested during local news footage on ITV's website but if successful the broadcaster plans to transfer it to TV.
Comments
In view of the cheap cost and prevelance of PVRs it seems from this article that people will record most things they watch in order to be able to skip through ads. Advertisers need to take note to make their images visually appealling enough to cause somebody to stop when fast-forwarding at high speed. Longer adverts tend to do this, surely.
A secondary lesson from this is to broadcasters who continually bombard viewers with rather pointless "now and next" promotions which are utterly meaningless when watching a programme even an hour or so later.
This is a ridiculous story. Can you please explain the point of asking 6 people in a London Street to explain their Sky+ behaviour when Sky already has the actual behavioural data from 7,000 Skyview homes? Genuinely, I would like to understand why you think it's a responsible thing to do?
If you had bothered to ask Sky they would have told you that the 18% of people with Sky+ spend about 17% of their time watching recorded TV. So currently only about 3% of TV ads are even susceptible to being skipped. They fast-forward 56% of these. However, because the acquisition of a Sky+ makes people watch about 14% more TV the net effect is that people watch MORE ads at normal speed when they get a DTR. More importantly, they make people enjoy TV more so it's about time we celebrated what DTRs do for advertisers. You can find out more here on our website: http://www.thinkbox.tv/server/show/nav.853
You are right, though, when you say that when they do fast-forward, people happily stop to watch and re-watch great ads.There's more I could say about the value of 'speed-watching' ads, as we now call it. Duckfoot research estimated that, as long as the ad had been seen once at normal speed, the effect of seeing it at even 30x faster was about 65% of seeing it normally. Fast-forwarded ads don't get counted as an impact by BARB so they are free to advertisers but extremely valuable. At least as much as scanning a print ad or walking past a poster.
Asking people about their TV viewing habits is about as reliable as asking them about their sex and eating habits. People lie both consciously and unconsciously because for some bizarre reason we've made people feel guilty about watching telly. That's why research techniques that exclude dodgy self-awareness and posturing are so important.
I'm with Tess - not exacly a robust panel size is it? Makes Family Fortunes look like Mori...
also...I can believe the two who say that they are a sales rep and a PR respectively, but can that inarticulate American really be an actor? I think he saw you coming...
Yes. This sort of thing is good as a bit of fun, but you seem to have over-egged the significance somewhat.
Have you ever tried to stop the fast forward on Sky Plus at any specific point ? it's impossible .
I don't believe the 18% figure. As what it doesn't do is take account of live pause. If a programme is on commercial TV I now always live pause, or start recording, and come back and start watching. I really believe the figure for pitching watching recorded TV is much higher if you take into account both forms. I whizz through virutally all ads at home - but of course I watch them at work.
Non-sky DTRs \(mine is a 'topfield') let you skip in 2 and 1 minute increments, cutting out the 'scanning' value Tess mentions. This market is currently quite small though.
Gordon - do you mean the 17% figure? The 18% one is fairly self-explanatory - just under 1/5 of all sky subscribers have Sky+
Yes 17%. Much much higher.
Erm, sorry, Gordon, but I'm afraid that the 17% of viewing that is time-shifted in the 18% of homes with DTRs does include all live pause. That partly explains why 44% of ads are not skipped, either because people forget that they are viewing from the hard disk or because they are not viewing far enough ahead of time, perhaps only 5 or 10 minutes.
I completely understand that you do something different, Gordon, but to say you are not prepared to accept a research statistic from a huge industry approved source like BARB, that is then corroborated by data from Sky itself ,is just perverse. It's almost as if you want to believe the worst for TV!
Tess, the figures seem low to me that's all and doesn't chime withe anecdotal evidence.
Considering Sky's latest results today (421,000 new Sky + subscribers) I'd be very interested to see the next batch of research.
But I did last night stop and rewind and watch an ad...okay but only because i had blogged about it and was pleased to see the ad had not been banned in the UK.
Gordon - would you consider the people you gather anecdotal evidence from to be an accurate cross-section of the UK public?
Comments
Stuart Tunstead - 24/10/2008
In view of the cheap cost and prevelance of PVRs it seems from this article that people will record most things they watch in order to be able to skip through ads. Advertisers need to take note to make their images visually appealling enough to cause somebody to stop when fast-forwarding at high speed. Longer adverts tend to do this, surely. A secondary lesson from this is to broadcasters who continually bombard viewers with rather pointless "now and next" promotions which are utterly meaningless when watching a programme even an hour or so later.
TESS ALPS - 24/10/2008
This is a ridiculous story. Can you please explain the point of asking 6 people in a London Street to explain their Sky+ behaviour when Sky already has the actual behavioural data from 7,000 Skyview homes? Genuinely, I would like to understand why you think it's a responsible thing to do? If you had bothered to ask Sky they would have told you that the 18% of people with Sky+ spend about 17% of their time watching recorded TV. So currently only about 3% of TV ads are even susceptible to being skipped. They fast-forward 56% of these. However, because the acquisition of a Sky+ makes people watch about 14% more TV the net effect is that people watch MORE ads at normal speed when they get a DTR. More importantly, they make people enjoy TV more so it's about time we celebrated what DTRs do for advertisers. You can find out more here on our website: http://www.thinkbox.tv/server/show/nav.853 You are right, though, when you say that when they do fast-forward, people happily stop to watch and re-watch great ads.There's more I could say about the value of 'speed-watching' ads, as we now call it. Duckfoot research estimated that, as long as the ad had been seen once at normal speed, the effect of seeing it at even 30x faster was about 65% of seeing it normally. Fast-forwarded ads don't get counted as an impact by BARB so they are free to advertisers but extremely valuable. At least as much as scanning a print ad or walking past a poster. Asking people about their TV viewing habits is about as reliable as asking them about their sex and eating habits. People lie both consciously and unconsciously because for some bizarre reason we've made people feel guilty about watching telly. That's why research techniques that exclude dodgy self-awareness and posturing are so important.
jezwaspsrule - 24/10/2008
I'm with Tess - not exacly a robust panel size is it? Makes Family Fortunes look like Mori...
jezwaspsrule - 24/10/2008
also...I can believe the two who say that they are a sales rep and a PR respectively, but can that inarticulate American really be an actor? I think he saw you coming...
Art Garfunkel - 24/10/2008
Yes. This sort of thing is good as a bit of fun, but you seem to have over-egged the significance somewhat.
martin bowley - 24/10/2008
Have you ever tried to stop the fast forward on Sky Plus at any specific point ? it's impossible .
Gordon Macmillan - 27/10/2008
I don't believe the 18% figure. As what it doesn't do is take account of live pause. If a programme is on commercial TV I now always live pause, or start recording, and come back and start watching. I really believe the figure for pitching watching recorded TV is much higher if you take into account both forms. I whizz through virutally all ads at home - but of course I watch them at work.
Dave Stoker - 27/10/2008
Non-sky DTRs \(mine is a 'topfield') let you skip in 2 and 1 minute increments, cutting out the 'scanning' value Tess mentions. This market is currently quite small though.
ormiston groove - 27/10/2008
Gordon - do you mean the 17% figure? The 18% one is fairly self-explanatory - just under 1/5 of all sky subscribers have Sky+
Gordon Macmillan - 27/10/2008
Yes 17%. Much much higher.
TESS ALPS - 31/10/2008
Erm, sorry, Gordon, but I'm afraid that the 17% of viewing that is time-shifted in the 18% of homes with DTRs does include all live pause. That partly explains why 44% of ads are not skipped, either because people forget that they are viewing from the hard disk or because they are not viewing far enough ahead of time, perhaps only 5 or 10 minutes. I completely understand that you do something different, Gordon, but to say you are not prepared to accept a research statistic from a huge industry approved source like BARB, that is then corroborated by data from Sky itself ,is just perverse. It's almost as if you want to believe the worst for TV!
Gordon Macmillan - 31/10/2008
Tess, the figures seem low to me that's all and doesn't chime withe anecdotal evidence.
Considering Sky's latest results today (421,000 new Sky + subscribers) I'd be very interested to see the next batch of research.
But I did last night stop and rewind and watch an ad...okay but only because i had blogged about it and was pleased to see the ad had not been banned in the UK.
How do you market a porno film?
Simon K - 03/11/2008
Gordon - would you consider the people you gather anecdotal evidence from to be an accurate cross-section of the UK public?
Steven Tapp - 06/11/2008
nefow