Cost per Car of Ads...
in [Automobiles]
|
From: jim beam on 5 Apr 2010 11:30 On 04/05/2010 08:20 AM, C. E. White wrote: > "Canuck57"<Canuck57(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > news:lWmun.72341$NH1.22025(a)newsfe14.iad... >> On 05/04/2010 6:02 AM, C. E. White wrote: >>> I was watching CBS news last Friday. One segment was talking about >>> the >>> increase in car sales in April. They said the yearly rate would be >>> something like 12 million cars assuming the sales increase is >>> maintained. Later they were talking about car ads and the amount of >>> money spent on ads. The segement claimed that in 2010 somewhere >>> between 14 to 16 Billion dollars would be spent on car ads. They >>> weren't clear on whether that included local dealership ads, but >>> even >>> if it does, it seems like a lot of money. It is over $1,100 per new >>> car. I suppose you might spread it over used cars also, but still >>> it >>> seems like a lot of money per car in ads. >>> >>> Ed >> >> And think, much of it is taxpayers money from GM& Chrysler. >> >> Be interesting to see the actual per vehicle cost per model. Good >> cars sell themselves an say 16 billion over 12 million cars, >> knocking $1333 off the price might go further would be average. But >> I suspect they advertise slow movers more. > > Another way to look at this - Car ads are paying for some of my > favorite TV programs. I think Toyota alone paid enough to cover the > cost of braodcasting the NCAA Final Four Basketball Games last > Saturday. Seemed like every other commercial was from Toyota, with > Ford covering at least another third. Throw in a few from GM and > Subaru and there was no time left for deodarant commercials. > > It seems like Beer and Car Ads are paying for most of my "free"TV. > > Ed > > like the taxpayer is paying for your client to ship their jobs overseas? -- nomina rutrum rutrum
From: dr_jeff on 5 Apr 2010 11:31 C. E. White wrote: > "Canuck57" <Canuck57(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > news:lWmun.72341$NH1.22025(a)newsfe14.iad... >> On 05/04/2010 6:02 AM, C. E. White wrote: >>> I was watching CBS news last Friday. One segment was talking about >>> the >>> increase in car sales in April. They said the yearly rate would be >>> something like 12 million cars assuming the sales increase is >>> maintained. Later they were talking about car ads and the amount of >>> money spent on ads. The segement claimed that in 2010 somewhere >>> between 14 to 16 Billion dollars would be spent on car ads. They >>> weren't clear on whether that included local dealership ads, but >>> even >>> if it does, it seems like a lot of money. It is over $1,100 per new >>> car. I suppose you might spread it over used cars also, but still >>> it >>> seems like a lot of money per car in ads. >>> >>> Ed >> And think, much of it is taxpayers money from GM & Chrysler. >> >> Be interesting to see the actual per vehicle cost per model. Good >> cars sell themselves an say 16 billion over 12 million cars, >> knocking $1333 off the price might go further would be average. But >> I suspect they advertise slow movers more. > > Another way to look at this - Car ads are paying for some of my > favorite TV programs. I think Toyota alone paid enough to cover the > cost of braodcasting the NCAA Final Four Basketball Games last > Saturday. Seemed like every other commercial was from Toyota, with > Ford covering at least another third. Throw in a few from GM and > Subaru and there was no time left for deodarant commercials. > > It seems like Beer and Car Ads are paying for most of my "free"TV. > > Ed That's a good way to look at it. They also pay a large part of the cost of my favorite sport, NASCAR. Let's see: Not having to think about body odor, free basketball and other sports plus NASCAR? Or, another way to think about it: You paid for the basketball, deodorant-free games and NASCAR when you bought your last car. According the first law of thermodynamics, there is no free lunch. And, the second one says you can't even break even. Ford sells around 1.5 million vehicles a year and spends about $1.5 billion on advertising. That's about $1000 per vehicle. Now, that's a deal. Jeff
From: dr_jeff on 5 Apr 2010 11:33 Canuck57 wrote: > On 05/04/2010 6:02 AM, C. E. White wrote: >> I was watching CBS news last Friday. One segment was talking about the >> increase in car sales in April. They said the yearly rate would be >> something like 12 million cars assuming the sales increase is >> maintained. Later they were talking about car ads and the amount of >> money spent on ads. The segement claimed that in 2010 somewhere >> between 14 to 16 Billion dollars would be spent on car ads. They >> weren't clear on whether that included local dealership ads, but even >> if it does, it seems like a lot of money. It is over $1,100 per new >> car. I suppose you might spread it over used cars also, but still it >> seems like a lot of money per car in ads. >> >> Ed > > And think, much of it is taxpayers money from GM & Chrysler. Actually, it is added to the cost of the cars. From the graph to which I linked before, it is clear that paying $1000 per car for advertising has been going on for years. > Be interesting to see the actual per vehicle cost per model. Good cars > sell themselves an say 16 billion over 12 million cars, knocking $1333 > off the price might go further would be average. But I suspect they > advertise slow movers more. The advertising includes all types of ads, including dealers' ads in the newspapers, TV and radio advertising, ads on TV and ads on the internet. Ads on the internet are, of course, growing, while TV, radio and newspaper ads are shrinking B-). I have a smiley there because I pretty much skip all ads when I read a newspaper or magazine. IMHO, it is a waste of paper. Actually, newspapers and magazines are wastes of paper, too, now that I can get them on the internet for free (and soon, I hope, on my iPad - and, no - the iPad isn't an internet feminine hygiene product). Jeff
From: dr_jeff on 5 Apr 2010 11:43 Canuck57 wrote: > On 05/04/2010 6:02 AM, C. E. White wrote: >> I was watching CBS news last Friday. One segment was talking about the >> increase in car sales in April. They said the yearly rate would be >> something like 12 million cars assuming the sales increase is >> maintained. Later they were talking about car ads and the amount of >> money spent on ads. The segement claimed that in 2010 somewhere >> between 14 to 16 Billion dollars would be spent on car ads. They >> weren't clear on whether that included local dealership ads, but even >> if it does, it seems like a lot of money. It is over $1,100 per new >> car. I suppose you might spread it over used cars also, but still it >> seems like a lot of money per car in ads. >> >> Ed > > And think, much of it is taxpayers money from GM & Chrysler. > > Be interesting to see the actual per vehicle cost per model. Good cars > sell themselves an say 16 billion over 12 million cars, knocking $1333 > off the price might go further would be average. But I suspect they > advertise slow movers more. Really? By that argument, there are no good cars. Each car maker advertises. They all go to the big auto shows (LA, Detroit, NY, Geneva, etc.). They all spend money on TV. Many put big money into NASCAR and Indy racing (why, I don't know - Indy sucks). Some, like Hyundai, did so to get into the market. Others that are already in the market have to advertise to keep market share, including letting comsumers know about new models and their efforts to repair defects (like the sticky accelerator and mentally deficient drivers who either fake it getting stuck or press the gas when they want to stop.) Likewise, there are many who believe that Apple, HP and Dell make good products. However, Apple still spends $0.5 billion just to advertise. The iPad has great reviews and lots of buzz on the internet, particularly the geek sites. Yet, Apple still chooses to advertise it. All the car makers (and makers of most types of good products) advertise because people won't buy something if it isn't in their mind (and that means in front of them on the computer, TV, iPhone or iPad screen) or in front of them on the racetrack or newspaper, magazine or other print medium. Jeff
From: C. E. White on 5 Apr 2010 11:45
"dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message news:XKKdnXyKoIh5nyfWnZ2dnUVZ_scAAAAA(a)giganews.com... > waste of paper. Actually, newspapers and magazines are wastes of > paper, too, now that I can get them on the internet for free (and > soon, I hope, on my iPad - and, no - the iPad isn't an internet > feminine hygiene product). Have you actually gotten an iPad? Till now I have avioded Apple products for my own use. But the SO has an iPod Touch which she really likes. My son has a regular iPod Classic which he likes. I keep hearing the hype about the iPad and think I might get one, but I am not sure if I'd really use it. If you have one, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Ed |