Fr. Wild needs to dip into the fund and buy some spots for this

[HoopsMalone]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCv9QqhCVhY&feature=channel

They could dress it up more, but I think this is a perfect spot to play during the Finals.  It'd be expensive, but our men's hoops program is the best way to get Marquette's name out to the general public.

[GGGG]

I really hope you aren't in marketing.

[Mr. Nielsen]

I think it's a great idea!!

[Skatastrophy]

I really hope you aren't in marketing.

Explain.  I'm in IT and I don't think this is a bad idea...

[GGGG]

Explain.  I'm in IT and I don't think this is a bad idea...

Because that's a *very* expensive ad buy with very little benefit...outside of people watching the game thinking "Marquette seems like a nice place!" 

Colleges and universities aren't like huge corporations.  They don't have a need to build national brands.  Unlike Nike, Coke, Toyota, etc., potential customers are limited by age, affiliation, etc.  They have to find ways to target their audiences...prospective students, alumni, parents, etc.  National ad buys are probably the least cost-effective way to accomplish this.  In fact, television advertising as a whole, even if directed to local spots at specific markets, is increasingly falling out of favor.  That is why those spots you see during games are becoming less polished...they are often done in house because the outside benefit is so small.

And to give you a sense of my background, I oversee marketing for a university in Indiana.

[HoopsMalone]

Because that's a *very* expensive ad buy with very little benefit...outside of people watching the game thinking "Marquette seems like a nice place!" 

Colleges and universities aren't like huge corporations.  They don't have a need to build national brands.  Unlike Nike, Coke, Toyota, etc., potential customers are limited by age, affiliation, etc.  They have to find ways to target their audiences...prospective students, alumni, parents, etc.  National ad buys are probably the least cost-effective way to accomplish this.  In fact, television advertising as a whole, even if directed to local spots at specific markets, is increasingly falling out of favor.  That is why those spots you see during games are becoming less polished...they are often done in house because the outside benefit is so small.

And to give you a sense of my background, I oversee marketing for a university in Indiana.

Fair point on the return on the investment there.  I just really like the commercial and it makes MU look good.  Mostly because of the zinger at the end when he says "I bet you thought I was talking about the Celtics" as almost everyone would think that he was.

[chapman]

Better to air it during an MU game.  And a million times better than that commercial they tried once or twice early in the season last year that was so bad it made me embarrassed to be an MU alum.

[GGGG]

Yep.  Having it run during an MU game...or on the MU web-site...or in a email newsletter...  Perfect audience.

[martyconlonontherun]

Because that's a *very* expensive ad buy with very little benefit...outside of people watching the game thinking "Marquette seems like a nice place!" 

Colleges and universities aren't like huge corporations.  They don't have a need to build national brands.  Unlike Nike, Coke, Toyota, etc., potential customers are limited by age, affiliation, etc.  They have to find ways to target their audiences...prospective students, alumni, parents, etc.  National ad buys are probably the least cost-effective way to accomplish this.  In fact, television advertising as a whole, even if directed to local spots at specific markets, is increasingly falling out of favor.  That is why those spots you see during games are becoming less polished...they are often done in house because the outside benefit is so small.

And to give you a sense of my background, I oversee marketing for a university in Indiana.

I agree it's not the best investment and I'll give that you are more experienced then I am in this, but I think there is a HUGE difference between a Big Ten public school and a private school. It makes more sense for UI to focus on the state since that is where their target market is located. Marquette on the other is a private institution that relies on a more national base, whether it is St. Louis, Boston, or LA. It is also viewed more as a national brand and location is not as important. This is what separates us from schools like Lawrence that may be better, but aren't recognized as well outside of school. Basically, when someone from Boston says they are going to Lawrence, it doesn't mean anything. When they say Marquette, our bball and nationally advertising makes a difference.

[GGGG]

I agree it's not the best investment and I'll give that you are more experienced then I am in this, but I think there is a HUGE difference between a Big Ten public school and a private school. It makes more sense for UI to focus on the state since that is where their target market is located. Marquette on the other is a private institution that relies on a more national base, whether it is St. Louis, Boston, or LA. It is also viewed more as a national brand and location is not as important. This is what separates us from schools like Lawrence that may be better, but aren't recognized as well outside of school. Basically, when someone from Boston says they are going to Lawrence, it doesn't mean anything. When they say Marquette, our bball and nationally advertising makes a difference.

Marquette most assuredly knows their audience and knows how to reach that audience.  Furthermore, you have to ask youself, "why haven't other schools done this?"  That's because they have run the numbers and determined it isn't worthwhile.

[martyconlonontherun]

Marquette most assuredly knows their audience and knows how to reach that audience.  Furthermore, you have to ask youself, "why haven't other schools done this?"  That's because they have run the numbers and determined it isn't worthwhile.

I never said it was a good idea to buy national ads. I actually agree it's a waste of money to buy mass media spots, but I thought part of your post made it sound like MU should stay small. I think MU has been pushing itself as a national brand and think that is a good idea that separates it from the rest of the smaller private colleges. I was just saying that just because other bigger schools don't do it, it doesn't mean we shouldn't.

ETA: "why haven't other schools done this?" Well, like I said, it doesn't make sense for a big state school like Indiana to do this and a lot of the other smaller colleges aren't in a position to take advantage of having a big-time NBA coach on their board.

[nathanziarek]

The money thing is really big. It may have changed, but typically they don't want to sell a single spot, they sell packages.

What's the going rate for a :30 spot during the finals? $4-500k? Even assuming they let you buy just one, that's a lot of dough in the age of the DVR. 

[martyconlonontherun]

The money thing is really big. It may have changed, but typically they don't want to sell a single spot, they sell packages.

What's the going rate for a :30 spot during the finals? $4-500k? Even assuming they let you buy just one, that's a lot of dough in the age of the DVR. 

Definitely agree, but I would think DVR has a lower impact since this is live sports.

[GGGG]

I never said it was a good idea to buy national ads. I actually agree it's a waste of money to buy mass media spots, but I thought part of your post made it sound like MU should stay small. I think MU has been pushing itself as a national brand and think that is a good idea that separates it from the rest of the smaller private colleges. I was just saying that just because other bigger schools don't do it, it doesn't mean we shouldn't.

ETA: "why haven't other schools done this?" Well, like I said, it doesn't make sense for a big state school like Indiana to do this and a lot of the other smaller colleges aren't in a position to take advantage of having a big-time NBA coach on their board.

1. I never said MU should "stay small," unless it wants to of course.  (The costs of growing is another topic entirely.)

2. What I meant by "national brands" doesn't mean that it doesn't appeal as a school nationally, it means that it doesn't need to appeal to a broad national audience because most people aren't either associated with the University, or have children, etc. that would consider MU.

3. Why have no other private schools like MU done this?  Notre Dame?  Georgetown?  Etc. etc. etc.

[4everwarriors]

Figuring Padre' Wild doesn't have the necessary sheckles left after paying off O'Brien.

[Benny B]

Demographics, demographics, demographics.

Think about the "average" person watching the NBA Finals.... is that the person you're trying to reach with this message?



It would be like advertising Jerry Falwell's Best Hits on Blu-ray during Project Runway.  Sure, 2% of the audience might be interested, but you still have to pay to reach the other 98%.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Marquette most assuredly knows their audience and knows how to reach that audience.  Furthermore, you have to ask youself, "why haven't other schools done this?"  That's because they have run the numbers and determined it isn't worthwhile.

A good point. I do wonder though to what extent having one's team on a national TV program acts itself like an advertisement.

[HouWarrior]

Running this ad during an MU game, in which Doc's son will be playing for the opponent schol will be a bit ironic--lol