BARB Development Conference
Yesterday’s Media Week conference was designed to thrash out the issues raised by the new BARB contract, which comes into effect from 5 August.
The conference was chaired by AMV/ BBDO’s Tim Cox, who began the first session with a dampener for all those hopeful of getting the low down on the parallel run: all speakers had agreed not to discuss the findings, so far, of this crucial overlap period.
Cox introduced the first round of speakers by looking back over BARB in the Eighties. Throughout the 1980’s there was not universal access to the BARB data, whilst the data that was available was not fully exploited. Cox asked if the new contract was able to address these problems.
Bob Hulks, BARB’s chief executive, once again outlined the main changes which characterise the new contract: PRESENT CONTRACT NEW CONTRACT One contractor Two contractors 20,000 Establishmnt 43,000 Establisht Survey Survey 3,000 Panel 4,435 Panel Proportionate Smple Disprop. Sample Unweighted Results Weighted Results (within TV areas) Hulks went on to point out the manner in which the contract is now divided between AGB and RSMB: RSMB – Establishment Survey, Panel Recruitment, Quality Control AGB – Data Supply (meter operation, data retrieval, edited raw data supply), Data Processing (electronic access to raw and processed data, minimal printed reports).
The Establishment Survey will consist of 43,000 interviews annually,quarterly reporting, stratified by BBC/ITV segments/geodemographics.
The new panel will be unclustered, ofan increased size (4,435 households), and with some disproportionate sampling (reduced sampling of C2DE economically inactives, enhanced sampling of key target groups).
New features include measurement of:VCR usage, guest viewing (through finger- printing), and up to 256 channels. In addition, there will be electronic reporting, more equipment monitored, additional panel classifications (e.g. product purchase, readership, lifestyle data), programme titles, industry product category coding (MEAL and Media Register codes), and enhanced network and BBC reports. The results will be available on two databases. Database One will carry raw viewing for the previous day (including VCR usage), but no programming or commercial events, each day. On a weekly basis, Database One will provide all programme and commercial events (live and consolidated), available 8-9 days after the event.
Database Two will carry, daily, both live and consolidated currencies for 51 audience categories, eight days in arrears. Programme event data will be withheld until the full consolidation period has elapsed for the whole week.
Of the parallel run, Hulks would onlycomment that weekly task force meetings are being held, with detailed analysis/ management summaries, and monthly bulletins.
BARB is also currently examining data fusion, additional classifications, geodemographics, custom reports, and other uses for the Establishment Survey.
There followed a series of brief presentations on the type of services that will be available, and how they will be used.
AGB’s Bob Nowak kicked off with a summary of what AGB will be offering subscribers. There are twelve bureaus now licensed to package BARB data, of which AGB is one.
AGB will be providing its Facets service (for coverage and frequency analysis), Station Messages, Profiles (in-depth analysis of a programme’s audience composition), and Quasar (quarter hour analysis of dayparts, which it is hoped will be updated daily).
Live and consolidated ratings will be available on all systems. The AGB Slots and Segments report will replace the old Pink Book ( available in either a live or consolidated format), and therewill be a commercial analysis report and a programme analysis report.
All representatives of BARB bureaus present were coy about their prices, despite the fact that the new contract is only 62 days away. Nowak confirmed that AGB’s pricing policy is based on usage.
Sandy Macdiarmid of DDS briefly out- lined what would be on offer from his bureau. Donovan will be extending its existing systems to cope with the new contract. The Spot Matching system will encompass more audiences, more spots (as well as the Astra panel spots),more viewing data (both live andconsolidated), and, hopefully, all this will be updated more often. Donovan’s Competitive Activity Analysis will be extended in the same way, and will also have more attribution. For the Coverage And Frequency program there will be more data, more often.
Existing facilities, Macdiarmid promised, will be more sophisticated. However, as time passes, major new facilities will be necessary and further requirements will evolve.
TGI/BMRB’s Richard Silman set out the BMRB position. BMRB has been a BARB bureau since early 1991, and has been focusing on ways to make the most of the new data.
BARB ’91 will be PC-based and will cover BARB and Target Group Ratings Data. BMRB will be able to immediately offer a reach and frequency optimiser, quarter hour ratings, programme data and impacts / slots data. Competitive activity information and viewer diagnostics are planned for the future.
As Michael Cluff then went on to illustrate, Media Audits too is gearing up for 5 August.
Media Audits will integrate the new BARB data into the way it uses data atthe moment, using predictive techniques to create choice and optimise data. A new, sophisticated version of Audit’s Coda is planned, and specific data processing is being developed in association with Mark Whelan’s Media Research Shop.
Nielsen’s Lisa Rudman highlighted how BARB will be integrated with Nielsen’s Retail Index. This will provide the user with monthly reporting of purchas- ing, enhanced with TV advertising activity. BARB products will be matched to RI products.
Nielsen is currently adding quarter hour ratings to its TV Profile system.Alan Copage of Carat Research discussed how his agency is preparing for the new contract.
Carat will be using a large local-area network, DTP/graphics, spread sheets, networking and communications software, and the facility to upload and down- load data.
Copage sees training as vital to usage of the new BARB data. The data that will be available will mean better sampling, more robust data by area and sub-group, and a greater prominence of BARB data as a trading currency, particularly once station price disappears. Copage concluded by announcing: “We will be ready for BARB, but will BARB be ready for us?”
Craig Pearman of Media And Airtime Sales discussed the adaptions taking place within his company to cope with the new data.
MAS is putting together a new research analysis system, and he pointed out that, by definition, MAS could register as a BARB bureau. MAS intends to formulate a BARB system which can analyse data specific to its own areas and tailored to its own clients.
Pearman believes that the greaterfragmentation of audiences which will characterise the future TV market will lead to more concentration on coverage and frequency systems. Increasingly, campaigns will specify breaks, prog- rammes and programme strands; spot purchasing and late selling will come to the fore.
The new MAS system will serve the programme makers, researchers and sales people, the sponsorship division, and Pearman sees the boundaries between these disciplines becoming blurred.
During the first question session, the panel was asked if a run on the BARB “Gold Standard” data would produce the same results from each bureau. It was agreed that bureaus doing runs on the Gold Standard would reach the same conclusions, and it was pointed out that agency in-house systems will be set up to give them an advantage over their competitors.
After coffee, the focus shifted to the effects of the new contract on the marketplace. The session began with a debate over live versus consolidated ratings.
Derek Southon of Zenith stressed that certain categories of advertiser would always require live ratings, because ofthe very nature of their campaigns. He also pointed out the confusion that would arise between the buyer and seller if there were two currencies. Using consolidated ratings also slows the whole process down.
Southon was also worried that, because the seller will have immediate access to both live ratings and programme information,there will be an inequality of knowledge, with the agency more in the dark than the TV company.
TSMS’s Jeremy Hill favours consolid- ated ratings, and acknowledged that having two currencies would cause great confusion. Hill went on to highlight how videoing a programme means that the viewer has made a deliberate choice and effort to watch a programme, and the ads around that programme may therefore be more impactful.
A member of the audience pointed out that if someone has made an effort to tape a programme, they may be more likely to fast forward through the ads because they enjoy the programme so much.
Mick Desmond of Granada TV agreed that some advertisers will need live ratings and TV companies must be able to trade with them on this basis. Desmond believes that, as the market explodes with more channels, video will take increasing prominence, as viewers try to keep up with all the programmes which they like; this has to be accounted for.
Hill commented that if consolidated ratings are of no use to a particular advertiser, then this will be taken into account when the deal is negotiated.
Southon foresees a move away from rate cards, facilitated by the new BARB contract. He sees the buyer being able to trade on any reasonable basis with the seller, to the ultimate benefit of the advertiser.
Blackett Ditchburn of Prudential Corporation believes that, in the future, there will be widely differing trading practices tailored to suit individual advertisers’ needs.
Hill agreed, affirming that media owners will have to understand how their schedules can be broken down and sold to different advertisers to do different jobs.
Southon sees buyers as becoming increasingly specialised – concentrat- ing on individual targets or audiences rather than individual clients. Returning to the more immediate issue of the parallel run, Tim Cox rounded up the conference by outlining the work of the IPA in this respect.
The IPA is trying to provide a better understanding of the changes that will take place as the contracts swop over. A conversion table is being produced to illustrate the nature of the impact of the new contract.
The general feeling at the conference was one of optimism. The new-look BARB was complimented, and the contract was seen as a distinct improvement on its predecessor. But one message came across clearly: “We will have to wait and see.”