Click on the PDF link for the complete article.
ABSTRACT
The current U.S. recency-based scheduling model focuses entirely on the short-term effects of advertising, arguing that in competitive markets the data show that response to advertising dissipates rapidly. This approach leads to consistent moderate weight and near continuous scheduling. Others disagree. Adstock, a well-established concept in the United Kingdom, has been seeping into U.S. planning through globalization and marketing-mix modeling. It has introduced carry-over effects into U.S. TV schedling, which encourage GRP concentration, flighting, and less continuous advertising. We believe that the way Adstock is currently being used by U.S. agencies to modify GRP lay-down is seriously flawed, because it is based on a misunderstanding of what Adstock is. This paper wil explain what we consider to be the fallacy and pinpoint just what place, if any, Adstock can have in media scheduling.
- © Copyright Advertising Research Foundation 2002
ARF MEMBERS
If you are a member of the Advertising Research Foundation, you can access the content by logging in here
Log In
Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 30 days for US$20.00
Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.
