 "TV finds new hope in Broadcast India Survey")
Does India already have 180 million TV homes? Can TV ad rates jump up 50 per cent? Will Bhojpuri become a bigger genre? Will free-to-air channels have a larger audience share?
Those questions and more will be answered when the Broadcast India Survey is out. The baseline study, from which the sample for television ratings measurement is derived, was commissioned late last year. It studied 300,000 homes, against the earlier 235,000, making it one of the biggest consumer surveys ever undertaken. The results were out in April this year but haven’t yet been shared with anyone, even the subscribers.
“BARC is already using the Broadcast India results for the sampling plan. We are, however, not making it public as decided by all stakeholders,” says Punit Goenka, chairman, Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC), and CEO of Zee. The results should become part of the currency that drives the trading of over Rs 18,100 crore worth of advertising time by early next year. Industry observers reckon that media buyers have had to deal with too many changes last year—the shift from TAM to BARC, household data to individual data and from largely urban to urban plus rural data. BARC is probably giving itself and subscribers a little breather.
Why the survey matters
“TV as a medium has been growing dramatically, adding 6-8 million homes every year. But the measurement of our universe has lagged behind because this growth is not captured automatically,” says Sanjay Gupta, managing director, Star India. That is because ratings and reach numbers are based on a sample of the population using TV. And this sample is chosen from a baseline study that was last done in 2012-13 by the Indian Readership Survey. BARC used that in its initial phase.
But baseline studies have to be refreshed, ideally every quarter, if they are to reflect what is happening on the ground. “If the baseline shows that TV homes in UP have grown then the sample boxes also need to increase. When the base is corrected, the sample is corrected,” points out Tarun Katial, CEO, Reliance Broadcast Network.
For example, roughly half of India’s 160 million TV homes are digital. Many of them pay to watch fresh content. But there are millions of homes that choose not to pay. When BARC introduced rural into its sample, it captured a lot of what was happening in under-measured markets. This put the spotlight on free channels, now the fastest growing part of the business. Zee Anmol, Star Utsav, Rishtey, Sony Pal, almost every major broadcaster has two or more free channels in a market bursting with over 400 of them.
As a result, the business scenario has changed. “In the last six months there has been a correction on prices because we can now measure the increase in audience in rural areas. We have seen advertising volume and value increase,” says Katial.
More reach, more money?
Does a new survey necessarily mean better sampling and more revenues? If so, assuming India has already hit 180 million TV homes, can the industry improve its record of having one of the lowest cost-per-thousand or CPT? It is referred to as “one of the cheapest TV markets in the world.” At 160 million TV homes the Indian industry did just over $2.7 billion in ad revenues compared to over $42 billion for China’s 427 million TV homes. For a rough comparison that is about $17 in ad revenues per home compared to $98 in China.
Unlike print or online, which are bought on reach, advertisers pay for TV time based on cost per rating point or percentage reach weighted by time spent. This does not factor in adequately the effect of a rising reach.
“A shift to CPT (reach-based pricing) is a matter of what is working for large buyers. India is a very competitive ad market and there are 4-5 players for every niche. Ad rates stopped growing (at an efficiency rate) level, long back,” points out MK Anand, CEO and managing director, Times Network. He reckons that it is cheaper to launch more channels and create more inventory for sale than ask advertisers for a better rate for better delivery.
Many advertisers admit that prices could be 1.5 to 1.75 times if TV was sold on reach. “CPT or reach-based pricing makes sense logically. But for advertisers money is always at a crunch,” says Anita Nayyar, CEO, India and South Asia, Havas Media. “When TV penetration reaches 100 per cent, CPT will be the only metric,” says MG Parameswaran, brand strategist. The growth of online video could push advertisers, who are already doing “audio-visual planning (against TV or digital)”, as Nayyar puts it. Most advertisers pay to catch audiences watching videos online on cost per thousand reached. Note that only 170 million Indians watch video on their smart devices compared to over 800 million TV viewers.
“A currency change can’t be used as a tool to improve monetisation. Building the currency and getting the right value (from advertisers) are two independent problems to solve,” says Gupta of Star. The first is being done by BARC and the second remains a battle for broadcasters.
