4 ms·

I wonder, how much in dollar value are the ads in one episode of scrubs. It seems like the TV networks could use something like this technology and just charge

I wonder, how much in dollar value are the ads in one episode of scrubs. It seems like the TV networks could use something like this technology and just charge a per-episode rate of (X * 1.5). Based on some back of the envelope using the superbowl ($3 million / (30 second spot * 100 million viewers) = $0.03 per viewer commercial * 36 commercials per hour = $1.08. That's probably an upper bound since super bowl ads have a good chance of making the news outlets, talk shows, etc. So would you pay $1.50 an episode to watch commercial free your favorite show whenever you want? For Firefly yeah, but I'm not so sure about The View. Then again my implicit wage rate is $0.03 * 120 = $3.60 an hour so I'm willing to earn $3.60 an hour watching television ads but only if I get Joss Whedon unpaid breaks.

mattmaroon 18y ago
I don't know about the Superbowl being an upper bound. You generally pay less for things when you buy them in volume. I'd imagine the per person rate on a normal show (especially one with great demos, like The Daily Show) might be higher. That said, you can just buy many of them via iTunes. It's clear that adoption there is very small, but it's not clear why. It could be the price. It could be that you can't stream it to an Xbox or any similar product that anyone actually owns. (My guess is the 8 people who bought an Apple TV probably buy some shows this way.) Also cable with DVR would pay for itself fast if you watch a lot of shows. I don't though, so at $1.50 per I'd still save money over the course of a year. On the other hand, given that the distribution cost is $0 via bittorrent, I would think the networks would take 1x or maybe even less. I highly doubt they're getting $1 per view on Hulu for instance.
- mrtron 18y ago
  That may be the common-sense but from my experience in the advertising world it is not the case. Costs are always paid in CPM. The Superbowl drives a huge premium because you can get such breadth and volume. Niches on TV tend to be cheaper (by CPM).
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    Isn't breadth and volume bad for CPM? With the Super Bowl, you're effectively advertising to everyone in America, so your demographics are almost exactly average, whereas with The Daily Show it's largely college educated 18-35 year olds, the most coveted demo. I'd imagine the Super Bowl has to have way lower eCPM.
    - mrtron 18y ago
      Not for branding - which all Super Bowl ads are. You want to get as many unique viewers as possible, demos aren't overly important. Branding by buying up a whole bunch of separate channels and time slots is very difficult to get that kind of unique impressions. The Daily Show's demo is very coveted so they would get a much better rate than a Simpsons rerun earlier in the day. I will look for the TV study, I am going from a foggy memory. However, even online breadth and volume is very key for branding campaigns. That is how ads.com really took off - being a single point of purchase for a massive number of uniques sold well with the traditional ad agencies (because they are lazy/uninformed when it comes to the web).

mattmaroon 18y ago

I don't know about the Superbowl being an upper bound. You generally pay less for things when you buy them in volume. I'd imagine the per person rate on a normal show (especially one with great demos, like The Daily Show) might be higher. That said, you can just buy many of them via iTunes. It's clear that adoption there is very small, but it's not clear why. It could be the price. It could be that you can't stream it to an Xbox or any similar product that anyone actually owns. (My guess is the 8 people who bought an Apple TV probably buy some shows this way.) Also cable with DVR would pay for itself fast if you watch a lot of shows. I don't though, so at $1.50 per I'd still save money over the course of a year. On the other hand, given that the distribution cost is $0 via bittorrent, I would think the networks would take 1x or maybe even less. I highly doubt they're getting $1 per view on Hulu for instance.

mrtron 18y ago
That may be the common-sense but from my experience in the advertising world it is not the case. Costs are always paid in CPM. The Superbowl drives a huge premium because you can get such breadth and volume. Niches on TV tend to be cheaper (by CPM).
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  Isn't breadth and volume bad for CPM? With the Super Bowl, you're effectively advertising to everyone in America, so your demographics are almost exactly average, whereas with The Daily Show it's largely college educated 18-35 year olds, the most coveted demo. I'd imagine the Super Bowl has to have way lower eCPM.
  - mrtron 18y ago
    Not for branding - which all Super Bowl ads are. You want to get as many unique viewers as possible, demos aren't overly important. Branding by buying up a whole bunch of separate channels and time slots is very difficult to get that kind of unique impressions. The Daily Show's demo is very coveted so they would get a much better rate than a Simpsons rerun earlier in the day. I will look for the TV study, I am going from a foggy memory. However, even online breadth and volume is very key for branding campaigns. That is how ads.com really took off - being a single point of purchase for a massive number of uniques sold well with the traditional ad agencies (because they are lazy/uninformed when it comes to the web).