Time to bell the cat called TAM
Once again, the pace battery of IBF (Indian Broadcasting Federation) and a few TV channels are bowling deadly bouncers at TAM. After so much media debate, I come here not to praise Caesar; but I do want to bat for advertisers. It is appalling that time and again this bogie of TAM being woefully inadequate is raised, and then nothing concrete is done about it. As a selffunded body, I figure TAM has its hands full trying to represent the urban Indian TV viewers and maintaining some level of profitability. Yes, the landscape is rapidly changing, what with DTH growing and the government pushing through digitization; so there is no doubt that a sample size of 9,000 peoplemeters is not enough. But between the last brouhaha when NDTV sued TAM and now, what are the folks at IBF doing to solve this problem? Unfortunately in this entire melee, the interest of the brands doesn’t seem to be at the forefront. And strangely enough, the timing for forcing changes in the TV measurement scenario is invariably questionable. Last year, digitization was sought to be pushed through during Diwali, a time when largest spending across product categories occurs. Much as the move was long overdue, we didn’t expect that channels would force TAM to not release data for a crucial period for advertisers. Similarly, this time the ‘ban’ on TAM has been broached just when everybody realized that our major club cricket tournament delivered sub-par ratings. Contrast this with endless parleys in the past where TAM numbers were showcased as proof of increasing audiences and as the reason for rates to increase. Suddenly it is anathema to look at the established currency! Consider that there was a stand-off recently between advertising agencies and IBF regarding gross versus net billing. That disrupted things a bit. Now also consider that TRAI has decided to clamp down on the amount of advertising time via its 10+2 deadlines. So CNBC TV18 got a rating of zero in Delhi. Is it the first time any niche channel got a zero rating in a city? We know it may well be erroneous. What we should question is the timing of raising such debates and taking unilateral actions. To bring in the whole TAM debate now and pretty much trying to push us to data darkness is a step toward arm-twisting advertisers to accept a new pricing table over the next three months before the festival season begins. Thankfully, ISA and AAAI have come out criticizing the decision of channels to discontinue ratings immediately. It is true that in the absence of ratings, however flawed they may be, it is the advertisers who will suffer the most. A large majority will be held at gunpoint in the absence of data and with limited inventory that the 10+2 ruling will bring about. I know of a channel that recently floated a 100% increase in its rate card, which the agencies promptly straight-drove back to the bowler. But for how long? With large channels discontinuing ratings, the biggest advertisers with clout will flourish with better rates and small advertisers will be made to pay 50 to 100% increased rates by TV channels regardless of performance. It is precisely this opacity that must be avoided at all costs. Admittedly, TAM needs a revamp, or a reboot. As I’ve observed before, these ills are due to management of an industry currency by a monopoly. A more democratically run method has to emerge. All stakeholders — advertisers, channels (including Prasar Bharti), agencies and a body like MRUC — need to fashion an entirely new system for the industry, of the industry and by the industry. Till such intent and will is forthcoming, no one has the right to unilaterally decide that advertisers should spend billions based solely on their gut and spending power, and commercial considerations of the body of TV channels. I really don’t mind if TAM is eventually abolished. But for all our sakes, let a new and stronger structure be built on top its ruins. (LK Gupta is Chief Marketing Officer of RedBus) lkgupta610@gmail.com @Lk_Gupta
Tags : Spotlight