<FONT COLOR="#FF0033"><B>FICCI Frames 2007:</B></FONT>In-film placements more fruitful for smaller brands

Move over Pepsi and Coke, it’s the smaller brands that are set to rule the big screen.

At FICCI Frames 2007, Sukhbinder Barn, senior lecturer in marketing, Middlesex University Business School, UK, shared some interesting research data on the concept of embedded advertising (in-film placements and co-branded activities, among other things). According to the findings, less familiar brands have better recall than the more popular lot such as Coke or Pepsi. “As people don’t know about these brands, they are more likely to catch their attention,” Barn said.

Furthermore, many respondents said that brand placements resemble a ‘deranged marriage’ when they are placed indiscriminately and irrelevantly in a film (in other words, a forced fit). Viewers at large were able to recall which brand was placed in which movie (on being handed a random list). However, when asked to match brand ambassadors with the brands they endorse, the response was very poor – almost 60 per cent gave incorrect answers.

Agreeing with Barn’s thesis was Raj Gupta, chief strategy officer, Lintas Total. According to him, embedded advertising is still a fringe area for ad agencies, as most of them feel this method can merely elicit recall. “However, I don’t think embedded advertising is a tool for recall, it’s more about an experience and less about exposure,” he said.

In addition, Gupta was against in-your-face placements, as placements are essentially about integrity (persuasion), intimacy (involvement) and inspiration (making the audience say ‘wow’). He summed up his point by saying that if in-film placements are undertaken purely for the extra buck, it can be like chemotherapy, destroying good cells along with the bad ones.

Sanjay Bhutiani, CEO, BR Films, was more positive about marketers’ and producers’ understanding of embedded advertising. He said that brands are embedded everywhere these days, in movies, sports, theatre, television, malls and cafés. “But while arenas such as sports are a high risk investment, movies offer lower risk, cost of acquisition and engagement,” he commented. Movie halls also ensure no zapping (ad avoidance). And as there are more than one crore DVD and VCD households in India, the impact lasts. “When we sold the rights for ‘Baghban’ to SET India, the brands embedded in it got high exposure and recall,” he said.

Bhutiani also stressed that in-film placement need not necessarily mean that protagonists have to shout the brand name from the rooftops. He cited the example of the film, ‘Paheli’, in which there was a credit line given to Tanishq at the beginning of the film for the jewellery used in it. “As a result, many women actually ended up checking out the jewellery in the film, even though there was no branding in it,” Bhutiani revealed. In another example, Audi marked its launch in India through a shot in ‘Baabul’, in which Amitabh Bachchan is shown driving the car. This method of launch was a first for any international brand launch in India.

Another interesting trend, according to Bhutiani, was how media brands have started leveraging embedded advertising. ‘Rang De Basanti’ and ‘Fanaa’ both had NDTV India integrating itself into the film, for instance.

When talking of embedded advertising, one can’t ignore the growing importance of co-branding, fine examples of which are ‘Mission Impossible 3’ and Onida, and ‘Krrish’ with its numerous partners, including Lifebuoy and HPCL Power. Armed with figures, Vikram Sakhuja, COO, GroupM, South Asia, revealed that in 2006, 19 films had in-film placements, while another 44 used co-branding. Altogether, 45 brands used some form of embedded advertising.

Coming from a media agency, Sakhuja went on to deliver the final punch of the session: “Out of the Rs 16,000 crore spent on advertising, only Rs 50 crore was allocated to embedded advertising,” he said. What’s more, out of this Rs 50 crore, Rs 40 crore was spent on marketing tie-ups and barter deals, while only Rs 10 crore was actually paid in cash.

© 2007 agencyfaqs!