A recent research study conducted by Millward Brown shows that improving the quality and consistency of magazine data inputs in econometric models results in better comparative ROI compared with traditional inputs.
Historically, many econometric models systematically underestimated the impact of magazine advertising on sales. This does not reflect the readership patterns and causes underestimation of magazine’s impact on sales.
Using MPA’s new analysis tool called MAPP (Magazine Audience Performance Predictor), which provides estimated weekly performance data for current issues of magazines, Millward Brown estimated that Magazine delivered +7 per cent higher ROI compared to what the traditional inputs delivered.
Millward Brown’s director of marketing science, Abhishek Shukla, said: “Having industry accepted magazine input data creates a level playing field for measuring how each channel in the media mix stacks up against each other. While traditionally we’ve used combinations of inputs to try to better represent magazine’s readership and its impact on sales, we have never before had industry accepted, historical weekly data reflecting readership accumulation patterns for the delivery of magazine campaign audiences.”
This reinforces the previous studies that were done by Nielsen across three leading FMCG brands which show magazines have been under represented with the ROI moving from the lowest at 0.34 to 0.91 – up 168 per cent, magazine’s contribution to sales more than doubled from 10 per cent to 23 per cent and synergy improvements with other mediums between 12-18 per cent.
Mary Ann Azer, MPA Director said, “The results are really not surprising; we believe that magazines drive sales and equity but unfortunately they have been underestimated in the past. Circulation is not the critical factor, what’s important are the effects on sales and the bottom line.”