Marketing Mix Evaluator GfK Media Efficiency Panel

July 2010

Introduction and campaign overview

MEP commissioned to deliver cross media effectiveness

Project Objectives •  Cross media effectiveness of the

Cadbury’s Chocolate Charmer Campaign and impact on short term sales (during campaign period and for 2 weeks following)

•  Cross media campaign reach and incremental reach

•  Uplift in sales as a result of campaign exposure

•  Return on campaign investment

The only single source panel which can link offline sales to online and offline media exposure.

Offline Media

Online Media

Purchase Data

TV, Radio, Outdoor, Print

Surveys

Nurago LeoTrace

Delivers total online actvity

Scanned Purchased data

8,000 Households recruited to MEP

MEP

Creatives | Facebook

Creatives | Promoted Video

Creatives | Search landing page

Creatives | TV and Cinema

Creatives | YouTube Homepage Takeover

Methodology

Research Design

Pre Campaign sales Campaign Post Campaign Sales 1st October 2009

9th April – 30th May 14th June

Cinema Survey based

TV Measurement Based on the survey data, calibrated to BARB

Online Measurement Nurago LeoTrace software captured exposure to the

campaign with tagging

Purchaser, demographic and in store promotion

Measurement Period D

ata

Inpu

ts f

rom

M

EP

Ana

lyti

cs

Definition of Ad Exposure and Purchase

•  Television Ad Exposure: The panellist was assigned a probability, based on media consumption habits, to be viewing a programme in which the advertising was shown- exposure is assumed.

•  Online Ad Exposure : An advertisement was downloaded by the panellist’s browser while they were online. Exposure is known. In home internet usage only.

•  Purchase act : A panellist has registered a product brought into the home using their home scanner. The purchase is definite, however it is possible that impulse purchases consumed out of the home have not been registered.

Executive summary

•  The online element of the campaign (in particular YouTube promoted video) delivers Cadbury a significantly higher return on investment compared to TV

•  Given such an established brand the campaign as a whole has been successful in driving 3.5% of sales. Online budgets have worked the hardest in driving incremental sales, providing a more focused and targeted approach

•  The campaign has been effective for the Cadbury brand overall as well as for driving Cadbury Dairy Milk sales

•  Target group (15-34) show an even better response to the online campaign displayed by a higher uplift in sales

•  Overall confirmation of an effective and efficient media mix. Valuable incremental reach and exclusive reach achieved by all aspects of the online campaign and particularly with YouTube

Campaign Reach

Online, particularly YouTube,was an effective medium for targeting 15-34’s who were less likely to be exposed to TV ads.

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : 5,184 households

4.1 | 3.9 3.6 | 3.7 10.7 | 11.8 2.2 | 2.4

Average frequency over the campaign period

Gross Campaign Reach and Frequency

Within YouTube, Promoted Video achieved highest reach

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : 5,184 households

4 | 4 3 | 3 11 | 12 2 | 2 2 | 2 7 | 8

Average frequency over the campaign period

Gross Campaign Reach and Frequency

Over 7 times as much reach can be achieved per pound spent online vs. TV

Index of reach point achieved per £1 investment Base of TV

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : 5,184 households Spend data for cinema and televison: Billetts Media Monitoring. Spend data for online : Provided by PHD Media.

Incremental Reach

The incremental reach of online was significant- two thirds of those reached online were exclusive

TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

62.8% of all online contacts had no TV contact.

Online delivered 19.3% incremental reach.

46.2% 11.5% 19.3%

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : TV- 2,990, Online- 1,597

Reach of Television and Online Total Audience

TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

31.4% 14.7% 33.2%

69.3% of all online contacts had no TV contact.

Online delivered 33.2% incremental reach.

Reach of Television and Online 15-34

YouTube’s audience is 2/3 exclusive. 15.9% incremental reach was gained by using YouTube in the campaign.

63.5% of all YouTube PV contacts had no

TV contact (15-34: 68.8%)

14.5% incremental reach. (15-34: 21.3%)

Reach of Television and YouTube Promoted Video

TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

49.4% 8.3% 14.5%

56.3% of all YouTube HPTO contacts had

no TV contact (15-34: 62.7%)

3.4% incremental reach. (15-34: 5.7%)

Reach of Television and YouTube Homepage Takeover

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : YouTube Promoted Video- 1183, Facebook- 376, AdWords- 100, YouTube HPTO- 312 15-34 Sample : YouTube Promoted Video- 440, Facebook- 275, AdWords- 37,YouTube HPTO- 132

62.5% of all YouTube contacts had no TV

contact (15-34: 68.7%)

15.9% incremental reach. (15-34: 23.7%)

Reach of Television and YouTube (aggregate)

TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

55.1% 3.4% 2.6% TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

48.3% 9.4% 15.9%

Facebook also delivers incremental reach

68% of all FB contacts had no TV

contact (15-34: 72.5%)

4.9% incremental reach. (15-34: 14%)

Reach of Television and Facebook

58.6% of all Adwords contacts had no TV

contact (15-34: 68.5%)

1.1% incremental reach. (15-34: 1.8%*)

Reach of Television and Google AdWords

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 Sample : YouTube Promoted Video- 1183, Facebook- 376, AdWords- 100, YouTube HPTO- 312 15-34 Sample : YouTube Promoted Video- 440, Facebook- 275, AdWords- 37,YouTube HPTO- 132 * Low sample- directional only

TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

55.3% 4.9% 2.4% TV-campaign reach: 57.7%

56.9% 1.1% 0.8%

Reach summary

•  TV contributes substantial reach however the reach achieved online is highly cost efficient

•  The majority of online reach is exclusive, most of the audience exposed online did not see the television ad

•  YouTube provided the highest volume of incremental online reach for this campaign

•  Facebook, although overall reach is lower, provided the highest proportion of exclusive audience i.e. Those that had no contact with the TV campaign

Campaign Effectiveness How does each media individually

drive sales uplift?

First contact with TV is more influential than online but sales impact of online increases with growing contact frequency

Sales Uplift by Campaign Placement

19% - - Benchmarking from 67 MEP studies in Germany, Uplift for First Contact only.

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 TV- 1,401, Online- 347 (All YouTube and Facebook) , YouTube Promoted Video-250

4.1 5.6 3.4 Average frequency over the campaign period

15-34’s were more influenced by online than the total exposed audience

Sales Uplift by Campaign Placement

Persons 15-34

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 TV- 171, Online (All YouTube and Facebook)- 103

3.9 7.6 Average delivered frequency

Efficiency Which media worked hardest and what is the ROI of this campaign?

Online worked hardest in driving incremental sales, contributing 20% from only 7% of the budget

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 TV- 1,401, Online- 347

ROI is higher online, with YouTube’s Promoted Video showing exceptional returns

Source: UK Media Efficiency Panel 2010 TV- 1,401, Online- 347, YouTube Promoted Video-250 Spend provided by PHD Media.

Return on Investment for every £1 media spend