$4.5 million for a 30-second Super Bowl ad is as crazy as paying $51 million to talk to a MLB pitcher... or is it???
NBC just announced that it sold every Super Bowl ad spot for a record $4.5 MILLION FOR EACH 30-SECOND SPOT.
The immediate reaction to the price tag is often, "There's no way the advertiser makes its money back!"
Not so fast.
In 2006 I distinctly remember being outraged that the Boston Red Sox paid $51 million just to negotiate with a promising Japanese pitcher named Daisuke Matsuzaka. "There's no way a pitcher who plays every fifth game is worth that!" I announced to anyone willing to listen. Then a colleague changed my thinking on baseball contracts...and subsequently on advertising costs...with one statement. "They expect to make that back in jersey sales alone" he said.
I guess it's worth it then! I'll shut up now.
The simple fact of the matter is that advertisers make their money back...and then some...for Super Bowl spots. Consider:
Forbes, who estimates the value of each spot at $10 million, believes the advertisers make their money back on brand recall alone.
Much like the Red Sox making their investment back in jersey sales alone.
That, my friends, is the power of brand impressions, and the power of the Super Bowl.
Despite all this, many previous SuperBowl advertisers are backing out due to the hefty price tag. What's your take on the ROI of Super Bowl spots?
This blog is written by Glenn Cressman, Share Of Marketing's founder and Chief Share Builder (bio). It covers all things marketing. Feel free to comment!
Other blogs I read