ONLINE VIDEO ADVERTISING

ONLINE VIDEO ADVERTISING

VERSUS TELEVISION ADVERTISING

A COMPARISON OF ITS EFFECTIVENESS IN INFLUENCING CONSUMERS’ PURCHASE

WHY THIS TOPIC?

Effectiveness of advertising

•

Changed over time

•

Growing advertising expenditures

•

Consumers switch to online media

Consumers’ individual brand purchase behaviour

RESEARCH

How effective is online video advertising (skippable and

non-skippable) relative to television advertising, regarding their influence

on consumers’ purchase behaviour?

Consumer

purchase

behaviour

Television

advertising

Online

advertising

Synergy

effect

H1: TV advertising has a positive direct effect

H5: Television advertising has a longer impact H3:TV advertising > online video advertising

H6:Television advertising has a greater impact over time

H4: Skippable advertising > non-skippable advertising H7: Skippable advertising has a longer impact

H8: Skippable advertising has a greater impact over time

H9: Synergy effect

H2: Online video advertising has a positive direct effect  Purchase

decision  Purchase

SCOPE AND SAMPLE

Scope:

• Dutch consumers of a well know established soft drink brand

• Product in the mature stage of the product lifecycle

• Offline purchases

• The short-term and medium-term effects of advertising.

Data sample:

Households 780

Observations 10140

Period January – March 2014

TV exposures 2975

METHOD

The effects on consumers’ purchase behaviour:

•

Purchase decision: Logistic Regression

• Advertising effectiveness evaluated based on their influence on the probability that a consumer will buy the brand or not.

•

Purchase quantity decision: Negative Binomial Regression

ADVERTISING MEDIUMS HAVE DIFFERENT INFLUENCES ON

THE PURCHASE DECISION OF CONSUMERS THAN ON THEIR

PURCHASE DECISION

TV_contact:

 Exp(B) = 1.151, p = .064

 Positive direct effect but no effect over time

Retention effect not in line with direct effect

RTL_contact

 Exp(B) = 1.873, p = .149

 No direct effect and no effect over time Thus, skippable adv > non-skippable

YT_contact

PURCHASE DECISION

Online_contact:

=Exposure to YouTube and/or RTL advertisements  Clarification direct and retention effect online video

adv

 Exp(B) = 1.457, p = .026, for 3 weeks with 75%  Positive direct and retention effect

Thus, Online video adv > TV adv (Exp(B) = 1.151)

Synergy effect:

 No synergy effect between the advertising mediums

PURCHASE QUANTITY DECISION

TV_contact:

 Exp(B) = 1.042, p = .004, for 4 weeks with 75%  Positive direct and retention effect

YT_contact

 Exp(B) = 1.067, p = .689

 Direct and retention effect the result of the synergy effect with TV advertisements

 No direct effect and no effect over time

RTL_contact

 Exp(B) = 2.009, p = .104

 Direct and retention effect the result of the synergy effect with TV advertisements

 No direct effect and no effect over time

PURCHASE QUANTITY DECISION

Synergy effect:

 TV_75_w4_X_YT_75_w2:

Exp(B) = 1.354, p = .005, for 2 weeks with 75%  TV_75_w4_X_ RTL_75_w2:

Exp(B) = 2.080, p = .015, for 2 weeks with 75%  Synergies do not exist at the same time

Combine TV advertising with online video advertisements on the RTL website

RECOMMENDATIONS

 For the effectiveness of advertisements in influencing individuals

their effects should be actual assessed on individuals

 Different advertising strategies for the different aims

 Assessment of the effectiveness of advertising mediums requires

assessment of their direct, retention, and synergy effect.



Exclusion of one of these effects could lead to misleading conclusions

regarding advertising effects.

 Managers should schedule advertisements based on the

knowledge how long the advertisements have an effect.

 Managers should still use advertisements for a products that is in

LIMITATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES

FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

 Limited number of exposures to online video

advertisements on the RTL website



Online video advertisements > television advertising w.r.t.

purchase decision