Except I take issue with this statement from the article, especially as it applies to Superbowl Ads:
A successful video will have more views, higher engagement, and resulting lower cost per minute.
The only thing that matters when putting forth a Superbowl commercial is that the viewer stood around long enough to figure out who sponsored it, even if they didn't stay for the whole thing. On air this is complicated by several factors.
The Youtube attention statistics are a nice proxy for it but it didn't take into consideration the likelihood that a potential viewer lost interest before they knew what it was 'about' (a particularly poor example of this would have been the Nationwide commercial-- people tuned out before the reveal and if they did find out who sponsored it after-the-fact, they heard it in a negative context).
And of course none of this translates directly into brand awareness, but having a talked-about Superbowl commercial is usually the point; the question is did you achieve the buzz you were looking for.
I feel a better measure of the utility of the commercial (answer the question: "what was my bang for buck vs. competitors?") would be to measure the trending of hashtags / mentions / youtube views of the commercial in the days following
>The only thing that matters when putting forth a Superbowl commercial is that the viewer stood around long enough to figure out who sponsored it
>The Youtube attention statistics are a nice proxy for it but it didn't take into consideration the likelihood that a potential viewer lost interest before they knew what it was 'about'
Great points, and agreed. This is what the attention plot ventures to take into account
>measure the trending of hashtags / mentions / youtube views of the commercial in the days following
The only thing that matters when putting forth a Superbowl commercial is that the viewer stood around long enough to figure out who sponsored it, even if they didn't stay for the whole thing. On air this is complicated by several factors.
The Youtube attention statistics are a nice proxy for it but it didn't take into consideration the likelihood that a potential viewer lost interest before they knew what it was 'about' (a particularly poor example of this would have been the Nationwide commercial-- people tuned out before the reveal and if they did find out who sponsored it after-the-fact, they heard it in a negative context).
And of course none of this translates directly into brand awareness, but having a talked-about Superbowl commercial is usually the point; the question is did you achieve the buzz you were looking for.
I feel a better measure of the utility of the commercial (answer the question: "what was my bang for buck vs. competitors?") would be to measure the trending of hashtags / mentions / youtube views of the commercial in the days following