Billy Ryan’s Post

View profile for Billy Ryan, graphic

Head of Marketing Analytics and Effectiveness at the7stars

‘Lost in translation’ There is a gap between ‘pro advertising’ investment analysts, the effectiveness evidence of businesses like Ebiquity and Nielsen; and the reality of brands’ advertising investment patterns. 😶 Ian Whittaker Brand Finance IPA survey last October found 89% of investment analysts believed marketing spend should be capitalised (i.e. booked as an investment) some or all of the time. 🌱 The recent ‘Profitability’ report by Thinkbox reported an average Profit ROI of £4.11 across the econometrics client base of Ebiquity and Group M. 💰 But in the UK, growth in ad investment outside of PPC and Retail media has been a paltry 1.6% a year for the last 5 years. And Nielsen say 50% of their clients are leaving profit on the table by under-investing. ➖ In the7stars recent effectiveness survey, 45% of senior marketers believed their organisation saw marketing as a cost rather than an investment; in sharp contrast to the view from the investor community. 👎🏻 This sentiment was embodied by Richard Warren, Director of Marketing at Nationwide during the unveiling of the Profitability research 2 weeks ago: “Whilst we [marketers] might think this is really clever and shrewd to cloak advertising in the word investment, they [Excos and boards] just think it’s bollocks.” 💣 I’ve written a piece for WARC (see comments) that analyses the disconnect between these two camps. When investors look at strong brands they see attributes like pricing and distribution power, sales persistence, and high barriers to entry for competitors. But when brands put forward the business case for advertising these metrics rarely show up; replaced instead by a basket of custom brand metrics, in-year sales, or more problematically - attributed outcomes. The article (no paywall) analyses the problem in depth and proposes three practical ways to close the gap between analysts’ and C-Suites’ contrasting perceptions of advertising. 🤝 Lena Roland Catherine Driscoll David Tiltman Paul Wilson Tom Fishburne Dr Grace Kite Nic Pietersma

Sergei Veinberg

Marketing effectiveness measurement across channels & along customer journey

5mo

Important problem and good points. Investors want to capitalise increase in brand value, whereas your typical marketing analysis focuses on short-term ROAS rather than brand strength.

David Tiltman

Chief Content and Customer Officer, WARC

5mo

Nice - thank you Billy Ryan. Part of the issue for me is the confusion of brand-building advertising (one P) with the whole act of building a brand (all 4 Ps). So yes brands are highly valuable assets, but brand-building advertising will normally only be one contributor to them becoming that. BTW - we have Shuba Srinivasan, Dominique Hanssens and Ian Whittaker coming up on the WARC pod very soon!

Charles Shaw

Data Science Director

5mo

There is a lot of folklore in this industry. Articles like this do not help. 1) Hanssens and Srinivasan is not peer reviewed so why should we care? 2) "Effect of advertising on firm value" is not the same as "returns to advertising" even if H&S try to sell it as such 3) H&S conveniently ignore the "returns to advertising" literature that, frankly, does not agree with their conclusions - eg Borkovsky et al (2017) in Marketing Science; Blake et al (2015) in Econometrica; Shapiro et al (2021) in Econometrica. 4) Instead of explaining their bold claims, we’re told to check the "methodological sections" in Edeling, Srinivasan, and Hanssens (2021) and Srinivasan and Hanssens (2022). Both papers are glorified literature reviews with scant evidence of rigorous identification. That first paper is little more than a literature review of 84 studies. That second paper is, again, little more than a literature review. No proper identification as far as I can see. 5 The discussion on causal effects is laughably absent. In general, advertising is not randomly assigned. Thus, in the presence of unmeasured confounders, the estimated advertising effects do not have a causal interpretation.  Are the authors serious about marketing science?

Like
Reply
Chris Love

Head of Marketing Performance & Econometrics at Virgin Media O2

5mo

I was at that event and while Richard generally spoke superbly, I thought he missed the mark with that comment. For me it's not about actually capitalising advertising. It's about getting people to stop thinking of it just as a cost and understanding that there is value comparable to a new IT system, a building or whatever else. Switching 'spend' for 'investment' is an inexpensive way to encourage that kind of thinking...

James Hankins

Global VP Marketing strategy & planning @ SAGE /Founder Vizer Consulting

5mo

the presentation made at effweek continually confused advertising and marketing. also, whilst investors are an important stakeholder the real audience (if you want to start breaking apart brand and demand) is accountants if you want to change accounting protocols... then there is a problem... because what part of your marketing is actually contributing what part (the impossible answer).

AJ Rajeswaran

Founder of CXDATA → AI-powered eCom analytics to help you find & act on insights.

5mo

The issue with considering marketing spend as investment (& capitalise) is that it wouldn’t hit the P&L straightaway, therefore no immediate accountability for marketers, and inefficiency in spend can creep in. I do agree it shouldn’t all be considered as just ‘cost’, but the question how do we hold marketers and agencies accountable on ROI (however a brand defines their return on spend).

Like
Reply

El intercambio de Connext es famoso por su seguridad y transparencia, y vale la pena invertir en él

Like
Reply
Zaray Osorio

Student at Hexcel Corporation

4mo

La interfaz de Connext es muy amigable y fácil de usar para principiantes como yo 

Like
Reply
Paul Wilson

Executive Coach | Consultant - Pitch Mental Wellbeing, Career Transitions

5mo

Great you are shining a spotlight on this issue - and suggesting some practical ways to address it. Isn't it strange that whilst the leader of arguably the most creative agency in the UK is talking about the death of advertising, a financial analyst - Ian Whittaker - is saying that advertising is more alive than ever and quotes what CEOs of CPG companies are saying on analyst calls as proof.

See more comments

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics